Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #12586 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-07-21 02:47 -0700 |
| Last post | 2013-07-23 21:42 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 115 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded
Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 02:47 -0700
Re: Cutting panels John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> - 2013-07-21 08:05 -0500
Re: Cutting panels Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-07-21 10:38 -0400
Re: Cutting panels "Carl Ijames" <carl.ijames@nonono.verizon.net> - 2013-07-21 12:36 -0400
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 09:48 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:29 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 14:10 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:23 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 21:04 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 15:07 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 16:35 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 17:11 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:27 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-23 21:50 -0500
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:24 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-24 09:09 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-24 16:02 -0700
Re: Cutting panels hamilton <hamilton@nothere.com> - 2013-07-21 16:52 -0600
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 17:13 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 12:35 -0700
Re: Cutting panels amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2013-07-21 09:54 -0500
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 09:32 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:36 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 14:04 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:14 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:26 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 14:06 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 16:08 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Rich Webb <webb.ra@example.net> - 2013-07-21 19:42 -0400
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:45 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-22 07:51 +0000
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-07-23 05:57 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 14:46 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Lancaster <don@tinaja.com> - 2013-07-23 16:41 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-07-23 17:21 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-24 09:26 +0000
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 12:11 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-25 16:04 -0400
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 13:03 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 13:40 +0000
Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-23 07:38 -0700
Re: Cutting panels [solved?]/summary Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-29 15:18 -0700
Re: Cutting panels andrews@sdf.lonestar.org - 2013-07-21 12:45 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 19:17 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-21 19:45 -0400
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 17:07 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Peter Bennett <peterbb@somewhere.invalid> - 2013-07-21 16:57 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 20:58 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 21:02 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-22 09:20 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 12:15 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-22 16:17 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 18:52 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 14:00 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 15:13 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-23 07:09 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-07-23 10:03 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:59 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 15:54 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-24 13:09 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-24 15:51 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-26 09:13 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-26 11:35 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-26 12:06 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-26 19:44 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-26 22:21 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-27 08:12 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-26 13:42 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-26 18:50 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-26 22:49 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-27 00:53 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-27 10:16 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-26 23:52 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-27 17:36 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-28 09:22 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-28 12:31 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-28 13:48 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-28 14:20 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-28 16:35 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-28 17:39 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-28 19:38 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-29 11:15 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-29 16:30 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-29 17:38 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-29 21:45 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-30 12:20 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-07-21 21:38 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-22 00:39 -0500
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 01:39 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-22 19:09 -0500
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 20:10 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 14:07 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-22 18:33 +0100
Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-22 13:44 -0400
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 19:00 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-23 10:09 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 11:45 +0100
Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 13:46 +0100
Re: Cutting panels 0bama <0B@nocontrast.org> - 2013-07-23 13:06 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 22:19 +0100
Re: Cutting panels 0bama <0B@nocontrast.org> - 2013-07-24 08:05 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-23 10:07 -0400
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 01:26 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 14:18 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-23 11:38 -0400
Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 22:32 +0100
Re: Cutting panels Frank Miles <fpm@u.washington.edu> - 2013-07-23 21:37 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:16 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-24 10:37 +0100
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 01:27 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Gonadicus <gonadicus@no_spam.com> - 2013-07-23 12:46 +0800
Re: Cutting panels sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2013-07-23 04:58 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:13 -0700
Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 13:25 +0000
Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:42 -0700
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-28 19:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <kt4kio$1fl$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12810 |
Hi Joerg,
On 7/28/2013 5:39 PM, Joerg wrote:
> Don Y wrote:
>> I don't watch a calendar. Every day is the same as every other.
>> If I want to work on a car on a weekday, I work on the car. If
>> I want to write software on the weekend, I write software. I long
>> ago gave up on the idea of wearing a wristwatch. Keeping track
>> of the day of the week is virtually impossible given I don't have
>> to "report" to anyone/anyplace. And, with the absence of the
>> *seasons* (hot1, hot2, hot3 and hot4), its hard for me to even keep
>> track of the *year*! <frown> I usually get it right (when writing
>> checks) by March or so!
>
> Doesn't work well for us. Besides church there is also regular volunteer
> activity where other people rely on us to be punctual. Then numerous
> clients who do tend to work Mon-Fri. So I have to as well. And man needs
> rest once in a while. That is Sunday for us, Saturday is "chores day".
We do what we want, when we want -- for the most part. My other
half has lots of regularly scheduled "social activities". But,
aside from doctor appointments et al., my schedule is largely
left to my own choosing.
I do my volunteer work when I have time and feel in the mood. Sleep
when I'm tired. Chores when they can't be postponed any longer,
etc. Thankfully, stores tend to have long hours so I can usually
get to whichever one I need to visit *sometime* during the day...
E.g., we have a dinner appointment for Thursday that I will have to
be reminded of numerous times -- lest I find my sleep/wake schedule
has shifted to leave me sleeping when I should be entertaining! :<
>> At least if the network goes down, I know in a matter of seconds!
>> (even if I am not home at the time)
>
> The advantage with the simple irrigation controller is that if it croaks
> while I am gone I can simply tell my wife where to get a new one and she
> can install it. With a problem somewhere in the LAN that would be a real
> challenge.
What would she do if the hot water heater developed a leak?
I.e., you *fix* things that you rely on in a timely manner.
Note I can always pull the wires off *my* irrigation controller
and attach them to a storebought unit! There's nothing special about
the irrigation valves...
>> And you have only the capabilities that non-interconnected devices
>> have. If that works for you, great! You may find that folks with
>> disabilities (perhaps yourself, someday) find having to conform to
>> the requirements imposed by some sighted, nondeaf, mobile, agile,
>> young designer poses a bit of a challenge.
>>
>> [I have several friends with partial paralysis from strokes;
>> Parkinson's; ALS; missing limbs; deaf; blind or legally blind;
>> etc. The list gets *longer* as I get older! Ever watch someone
>> with Parkinsonian tremor use a mouse? "Just click on the red
>> box in the upper left corner..." Or, someone in a wheelchair
>> try to navigate to the garage to close the door before retiring?
>> Or someone blind wondering if they've turned off the lights
>> in the house before retiring? Along with ensuring the stovetop
>> is off?]
>
> That would be the point where I'd really start simplifying my life,
> getting a smaller house, maybe even consider a 55+ community. But as
> long as one spouse is ok it may not be an issue, as long as it doesn't
> cause undue overload stress level in the healthier spouse.
Unfortunately, many folks don't have a choice. Or, don't want to
give up their independence -- "yet". Our ALS friend lives by herself.
Despite the fact that she can no longer *speak*. We have friends
where one spouse is disabled -- and the other barely *able* (i.e.,
old). Try telling them "you should move into..." and its like
talking to a brick wall!
[I wonder what I will be like when/if that time comes?]
If, instead, they can avail themselves of appliances and other
living means that allow them to continue to live the lifestyle
they *choose*... <shrug>
E.g., when our ALS friend is in bed, she's there until the caregiver
gets her up in the morning! If someone comes to the front door,
she can't (physically) let them in. If she left the TV on in the
living room, it's going to *stay* on all night. If she worries
that she *might* not have turned off the stove, she won't know
until someone checks it in the morning (unless the house catches
fire before then!)
None of these things are difficult to provide. They just *haven't*
been.
If appealing to the toy desire of normal users lets quantities
increase so they become affordable for the folks who *need*
them (instead of just WANTING them)...
>>>>>> I think there will be a more in this direction RSN. There are
>>>>>> already firms touting "control your home from your iPhone"
>>>>>> (for only $60/month). When appliance manufacturers start
>>>>>> adopting integrated comms as a "standard feature", this will
>>>>>> get easier.
>>>>>
>>>>> They are touting since decade and nothing came of that.
>>>>
>>>> That's because it is inevitable! The problem has been having a
>>>> public (consumer base) that is comfortable with this concept.
>>>> Willing to pay for it, not afraid of it, etc.
>>>
>>> No, the problem is incompetence of marketing departments. Lots of people
>>> want this. When we showed our (less than reliable) X-10 stuff to people
>>> they absolutely wanted it. You and I can make a good quality PLC wall
>>> switch that retails for $19.95, but industry obviously can't.
>>
>> Industry wants early adopters to subsidize their entire development.
>
> That will never work.
Happens all the time! Early adopters always pay through the nose!
I'm hoping that circumventing the need for "big players" will let
"tinkerers" create a workable system -- even if a big player comes
in after the fact and tries to hijack the idea. (who cares as long
as the devices are available!)
>>>> One problem with time-of-use tariffs has been the relative inability
>>>> of consumers to adjust their energy loads with any level of
>>>> convenience. I.e., little more than "don't turn on the lights
>>>> during the day!".
>>>
>>> The real reason is that the utilities have screwed up the smart grid.
>>> The user has no feedback what he is currently using, no immediate
>>> feedback about market pricing, nada, zilch.
>>
>> But there is nothing for the user to *do* with that information!
>> How does he *know* what loads to shed to reap a given level of reward?
>> Does he even know *where* his power is being consumed? Or, when?
>> If he could look at a wall display and see it showing KW/Hr (i.e.,
>> "rate"), how could he determine *what* was contributing to that
>> figure? Run around turning things on and off and then run back to
>> see what the display indicates?
>
> This is exactly what home automation is for. Say someone starts loading
> the dryer. The computer in there senses the door being opened, then
> responds "Hey, a kWh is 45c right now, sure you want to do this?
> Yesterday it was down to 16c by 7:30pm". Or it could just suggest to
> impulse-tumble the load until the prices drop, then step on it and
> notify you on the display panels. You can hit [YES] or [NO].
Its easier than that! You do the things that automation can't
(i.e. load the washer). Let the automation decide when to actually
*wash* the clothes. Let it notify you when you are needed to
move the clothes into the dryer, etc.
Of course, there are countless "rules" as to what it should do
and when. E.g., growing up, the hot water heater was undersized
(oil fired). So, you didn't take a shower when someone was
doing laundry!
With automation, you can turn that on its head to favor the user
over the "appliance" -- *stop* the laundry cycle when someone
wants to use the shower (or, just delay when you would start the
cycle if you know folks will be taking showers, soon)
> It's easy. But it will only work if the utilities or at least the public
> utilities commissions wisen up, and the HA industry gets into gear. In
> other words all that has to come together.
You can save energy and gain convenience with automation. So,
use that as the "draw" and hope that others (utilities, regulators,
etc.) get on the bandwagon after-the-fact.
The problem has been that automation involves too many DIFFERENT
aspects of a home (we have not talked about businesses!). So,
its unlikely that manufacturer A will have its hands in LOTS of
these areas in order to pitch a unified, consistent framework
for "devices".
I.e., the solution has to come from outside those industries.
Put something in place. *Hope* people embrace it ("Hey, it
exists, its free, and its better than nothing!") and then
hope vendors follow.
>> ... SWMBO complained that the computers were drawing too much
>> power. I left the computers on and swapped out the plasma TV for
>> a conventional one (plasma needed service). When the next month's
>> bill dropped significantly, she wondered how -- given that the
>> computers were still humming along...
>>
>> If you can instrument these loads and give "something" control
>> over them, then you can more readily inspect their costs *and*
>> develop strategies to minimize those costs. E.g., use the swamp
>> cooler instead of the ACbrrr when you expect it to be reasonably
>> dry outside. Let the heat fall off as your "typical bedtime"
>> approaches (instead of casting that in concrete at a particular
>> time in a naive setback thermostat)
>
> Right. But there are no instruments.
See some of my URLs. What's sorely missing is the smarts (algorithms)
to tie things together. "Control your home from your smartphone!"
"OK, besides being 1970 technology, what does that *do* for me that
I can't do WITHOUT the smartphone??" (i.e., why can't *you* decide
when to lower the thermostat?)
>> ... The problem has been getting to
>> the actual *loads* in a "user acceptable" manner. E.g., the
>> CAL-TOU spec is 20+ years old (?). You will encounter smart
>> meters on many businesses and a few homes (e.g., "all electric"
>> homes where they have a different tariff to account for their
>> heating costs, etc.). But, what's the incentive for the utility
>> to deploy these on residences? Unless the consumer is willing to
>> sign up for a ToU tariff, why bother? (e.g., we can avail ourselves
>> of such a tariff but the terms are ludicrous so we'll stick with
>> the conventional tariff)
>
> Correct, because of ludicrous terms we also have no TOU. Someone needs
> to wake up first, and that's not happening.
They want it all. They forget that *I* have to gain something
before I am willing to GIVE something!
E.g., we have looked into PV solar (too expensive given our ages).
Going that route, you "sell back" surplus electricity (at a reduced
price!) to the utility. Heck, why have *any* surplus? Charge
batteries when you have power to spare. Use the batteries to
power *some* of your load in the off hours (instead of buying back
the electricity that you just sold the utility a few hours ago
AT A HIGHER PRICE -- "distribution costs")
>> How much is a TV worth? When will you decide that 102" diag
>> TV is "priced right"? Prices evolve. As does acceptance and
>> desire for features/capabilities.
>
> Totally different thing. A 102" TV is bought because the neighbor just
> got a 95" set and that peeved the other guy. Or it's football season. Or
> whatever.
>
> HA, in contrast, is a business proposition just like TOU or solar is. If
> it doesn't compute then people will not buy. Even I won't.
I don't see it that way. For businesses, there is a value decision
involved. For consumers, I still think there is a lot of "toy"
factor. "Have you seen the Jones' house? It practically wipes
your ass for you!"
>> We've still decided cell phones are "too expensive" based on
>> the level of use that they would see, here. Other folks spend
>> $100+ a month. For a *phone*???
>
> Well, we have ours for emergencies and I do for business. Costs us
> around $7/phone/mo. Worth it. We don't even use up the roughly 30mins/mo
> that buys so they keep piling up.
My other half has one "for emergencies". $100/year (I believe there
are cheaper alternatives but she needed something that had widespread
coverage as she was making annual drives up through some of the
lesser populated/developed portions of the state, into Utah, etc.
so that restricted her choices)
She has *once* used it for an emergency. The other times have been
"I'm at Trader Joe's. Do you want anything?"
<shrug> At $100, it's a bargain for piece of mind... (also pays
for itself when she *is* on those extended trips and would have to
resort to a payphone or motel phone to call home)
>>>> Question is whether you'll be strapped into a "subscription service"
>>>> or able to manage and control these things "locally". (There is
>>>> already a "dumb" service being advertised for $2/day to give you
>>>> access to SOME of the kit in your house. How much automation
>>>> could $700/year buy you?)
>>>
>>> Not gonna happen. That is the wrong approach for HA, unless it is
>>> specialty stuff where feedback to a supplier is required (I've helped
>>> design one of those).
>>
>> Already happening.
>>
>> <http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/04/26/att-launching-home-security-and-automation-service/2113511/>
>
> So AT&T wants to become another alarm company? <yawn>
EVERYONE wants to be in the services business! I suspect we will
see "subsidized appliances" in the future -- once they figure out
how to get those appliances to snitch on your usage patterns!
Then, sell that information to vendors who can pitch items to
you *in* your home!
(Like: "Free phone with 2 year contract...")
>> <http://www.cedmagazine.com/articles/2012/04/home-automation-the-new-frontier-for-service-providers>
>
> Quote "but the base price starts at $39.95 a month plus an installation
> fee" -> DOA.
But it isn't! Folks are willing to pay for security monitoring
services (surveillance), "Help, I've fallen and I can't get up",
etc. It's a wonder anyone has disposable income given all the
vendors trying to nickel and dime them to death! :<
(Most "services" are articifial. Why do I need to pay someone
$2/day so I can control SOME of my appliances from my iPhone?
Why can't my phone contact my home directly -- instead of
going THROUGH your "service")
>> <http://www.homesecurityhomeautomation.com/>
>>
>> <http://www.in-homeautomation.com/>
>>
>> <http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2013/06/03/time-warner-launches-home-automation-service.html>
>
> Quote "The service requires Time Warner Cable’s Internet service and
> costs $33.99 a month when bundled with cable TV or phone service. The
> contract, which includes a security monitoring service, is for 18
> months" ... You really believe that will fly? How on earth do they want
> to catch someone like us who will not subscribe to their cable TV or phone?
The same sort of people who already spend $160/month! Companies
don't care about you or me. There are plenty of other folks eager
to throw money at them!
>> FWIW, google would love to get into this! Not just see what
>> you go looking for "on-line" but see what you *do* inside
>> your home!
>
> So why don't they? They've got enough money. A few years ago they were
> on the right track by starting an eneergy monitoring thing. But then
> ditched it ...
They've embraced Arduino in the hope that folks will design
Arduino based gizmos... that they can eventually talk to.
Google wants to *live* in your pants (pocket)!
>>> So where is reasonably priced product available, right now?
>>
>> Depends on what you consider "reasonable". E.g., I don't consider
>> $3 for a single CAT5 keystone connector "reasonable". But,
>> apparently, there are peole who *do* (because you see them sold at
>> those prices and shelf stock varying over time)
>
> A keystone connector won't make home automation happen. That needs a lot
> more stuff.
Sure. My point was there are folks who are willing to pay that
price for a flimsy little connector. What are they willing to
pay for the rest of the enchilada?
>> Good luck with your tooth!
>
> Barbecue is off. We will eat soup tonight, can't chew anything :-(
Bummer. Shit Happens.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-29 11:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b5npqaFjahiU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #12816 |
Don Y wrote:
> Hi Joerg,
>
> On 7/28/2013 5:39 PM, Joerg wrote:
>> Don Y wrote:
>
[...]
>>> At least if the network goes down, I know in a matter of seconds!
>>> (even if I am not home at the time)
>>
>> The advantage with the simple irrigation controller is that if it croaks
>> while I am gone I can simply tell my wife where to get a new one and she
>> can install it. With a problem somewhere in the LAN that would be a real
>> challenge.
>
> What would she do if the hot water heater developed a leak?
> I.e., you *fix* things that you rely on in a timely manner.
>
She would have a new one installed. With a homebrew LAN that is kind of
impossible.
> Note I can always pull the wires off *my* irrigation controller
> and attach them to a storebought unit! There's nothing special about
> the irrigation valves...
>
In our case you just buy the same controller and transfer them over
verbatim. Easy. You can even have a pre-programmed unit sitting on the
shelf as a spare.
>>> And you have only the capabilities that non-interconnected devices
>>> have. If that works for you, great! You may find that folks with
>>> disabilities (perhaps yourself, someday) find having to conform to
>>> the requirements imposed by some sighted, nondeaf, mobile, agile,
>>> young designer poses a bit of a challenge.
>>>
>>> [I have several friends with partial paralysis from strokes;
>>> Parkinson's; ALS; missing limbs; deaf; blind or legally blind;
>>> etc. The list gets *longer* as I get older! Ever watch someone
>>> with Parkinsonian tremor use a mouse? "Just click on the red
>>> box in the upper left corner..." Or, someone in a wheelchair
>>> try to navigate to the garage to close the door before retiring?
>>> Or someone blind wondering if they've turned off the lights
>>> in the house before retiring? Along with ensuring the stovetop
>>> is off?]
>>
>> That would be the point where I'd really start simplifying my life,
>> getting a smaller house, maybe even consider a 55+ community. But as
>> long as one spouse is ok it may not be an issue, as long as it doesn't
>> cause undue overload stress level in the healthier spouse.
>
> Unfortunately, many folks don't have a choice. Or, don't want to
> give up their independence -- "yet". Our ALS friend lives by herself.
> Despite the fact that she can no longer *speak*. We have friends
> where one spouse is disabled -- and the other barely *able* (i.e.,
> old). Try telling them "you should move into..." and its like
> talking to a brick wall!
>
> [I wonder what I will be like when/if that time comes?]
>
We never know. But it is beneficial to prepare oneself. Because of our
volunteer activities we know most of the places in our area. It's good
to mentally prepare. Of course that's no guarantee, I know people who in
their younger years were perfectly willing to go into assisted living
some day and then when the time really came fought it tooth and nail.
> If, instead, they can avail themselves of appliances and other
> living means that allow them to continue to live the lifestyle
> they *choose*... <shrug>
>
> E.g., when our ALS friend is in bed, she's there until the caregiver
> gets her up in the morning! If someone comes to the front door,
> she can't (physically) let them in. If she left the TV on in the
> living room, it's going to *stay* on all night. If she worries
> that she *might* not have turned off the stove, she won't know
> until someone checks it in the morning (unless the house catches
> fire before then!)
>
> None of these things are difficult to provide. They just *haven't*
> been.
>
That's the problem. And will be for a long time to come.
> If appealing to the toy desire of normal users lets quantities
> increase so they become affordable for the folks who *need*
> them (instead of just WANTING them)...
>
>>>>>>> I think there will be a more in this direction RSN. There are
>>>>>>> already firms touting "control your home from your iPhone"
>>>>>>> (for only $60/month). When appliance manufacturers start
>>>>>>> adopting integrated comms as a "standard feature", this will
>>>>>>> get easier.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are touting since decade and nothing came of that.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's because it is inevitable! The problem has been having a
>>>>> public (consumer base) that is comfortable with this concept.
>>>>> Willing to pay for it, not afraid of it, etc.
>>>>
>>>> No, the problem is incompetence of marketing departments. Lots of
>>>> people
>>>> want this. When we showed our (less than reliable) X-10 stuff to people
>>>> they absolutely wanted it. You and I can make a good quality PLC wall
>>>> switch that retails for $19.95, but industry obviously can't.
>>>
>>> Industry wants early adopters to subsidize their entire development.
>>
>> That will never work.
>
> Happens all the time! Early adopters always pay through the nose!
> I'm hoping that circumventing the need for "big players" will let
> "tinkerers" create a workable system -- even if a big player comes
> in after the fact and tries to hijack the idea. (who cares as long
> as the devices are available!)
>
It only tends to happen for gizmos in a "must have" category. HA isn't
cool enough, therefore it has to be reasonably price to even create a
market.
>>>>> One problem with time-of-use tariffs has been the relative inability
>>>>> of consumers to adjust their energy loads with any level of
>>>>> convenience. I.e., little more than "don't turn on the lights
>>>>> during the day!".
>>>>
>>>> The real reason is that the utilities have screwed up the smart grid.
>>>> The user has no feedback what he is currently using, no immediate
>>>> feedback about market pricing, nada, zilch.
>>>
>>> But there is nothing for the user to *do* with that information!
>>> How does he *know* what loads to shed to reap a given level of reward?
>>> Does he even know *where* his power is being consumed? Or, when?
>>> If he could look at a wall display and see it showing KW/Hr (i.e.,
>>> "rate"), how could he determine *what* was contributing to that
>>> figure? Run around turning things on and off and then run back to
>>> see what the display indicates?
>>
>> This is exactly what home automation is for. Say someone starts loading
>> the dryer. The computer in there senses the door being opened, then
>> responds "Hey, a kWh is 45c right now, sure you want to do this?
>> Yesterday it was down to 16c by 7:30pm". Or it could just suggest to
>> impulse-tumble the load until the prices drop, then step on it and
>> notify you on the display panels. You can hit [YES] or [NO].
>
> Its easier than that! You do the things that automation can't
> (i.e. load the washer). Let the automation decide when to actually
> *wash* the clothes. Let it notify you when you are needed to
> move the clothes into the dryer, etc.
>
But there is nothing available at Home Depot or Lowe's to make that
happen. Consequently it's not happening.
> Of course, there are countless "rules" as to what it should do
> and when. E.g., growing up, the hot water heater was undersized
> (oil fired). So, you didn't take a shower when someone was
> doing laundry!
>
> With automation, you can turn that on its head to favor the user
> over the "appliance" -- *stop* the laundry cycle when someone
> wants to use the shower (or, just delay when you would start the
> cycle if you know folks will be taking showers, soon)
>
Well, yeah, those things we tend to figure out the old-fashioned way by
turning stuff on and off. For example, we set the sprinklers to come on
and be through before we take our morning showers.
>> It's easy. But it will only work if the utilities or at least the public
>> utilities commissions wisen up, and the HA industry gets into gear. In
>> other words all that has to come together.
>
> You can save energy and gain convenience with automation. So,
> use that as the "draw" and hope that others (utilities, regulators,
> etc.) get on the bandwagon after-the-fact.
>
Not going to work. There is no consumer payback without intelligent TOU
tariffs. So consumers won't buy.
> The problem has been that automation involves too many DIFFERENT
> aspects of a home (we have not talked about businesses!). So,
> its unlikely that manufacturer A will have its hands in LOTS of
> these areas in order to pitch a unified, consistent framework
> for "devices".
>
> I.e., the solution has to come from outside those industries.
> Put something in place. *Hope* people embrace it ("Hey, it
> exists, its free, and its better than nothing!") and then
> hope vendors follow.
>
It requires the utilities or regulators to get it. And they don't, yet.
>>> ... SWMBO complained that the computers were drawing too much
>>> power. I left the computers on and swapped out the plasma TV for
>>> a conventional one (plasma needed service). When the next month's
>>> bill dropped significantly, she wondered how -- given that the
>>> computers were still humming along...
>>>
>>> If you can instrument these loads and give "something" control
>>> over them, then you can more readily inspect their costs *and*
>>> develop strategies to minimize those costs. E.g., use the swamp
>>> cooler instead of the ACbrrr when you expect it to be reasonably
>>> dry outside. Let the heat fall off as your "typical bedtime"
>>> approaches (instead of casting that in concrete at a particular
>>> time in a naive setback thermostat)
>>
>> Right. But there are no instruments.
>
> See some of my URLs. ...
That's mostly alarm systems. Not very useful for real HA.
> ... What's sorely missing is the smarts (algorithms)
> to tie things together. "Control your home from your smartphone!"
> "OK, besides being 1970 technology, what does that *do* for me that
> I can't do WITHOUT the smartphone??" (i.e., why can't *you* decide
> when to lower the thermostat?)
>
First there needs to be the hardware, the devices that actually control
stuff. They ain't there.
>>> ... The problem has been getting to
>>> the actual *loads* in a "user acceptable" manner. E.g., the
>>> CAL-TOU spec is 20+ years old (?). You will encounter smart
>>> meters on many businesses and a few homes (e.g., "all electric"
>>> homes where they have a different tariff to account for their
>>> heating costs, etc.). But, what's the incentive for the utility
>>> to deploy these on residences? Unless the consumer is willing to
>>> sign up for a ToU tariff, why bother? (e.g., we can avail ourselves
>>> of such a tariff but the terms are ludicrous so we'll stick with
>>> the conventional tariff)
>>
>> Correct, because of ludicrous terms we also have no TOU. Someone needs
>> to wake up first, and that's not happening.
>
> They want it all. They forget that *I* have to gain something
> before I am willing to GIVE something!
>
> E.g., we have looked into PV solar (too expensive given our ages).
> Going that route, you "sell back" surplus electricity (at a reduced
> price!) to the utility. ...
And therein lies the problem. Why is it that when we strain ourselves to
be good and feed 8kW back at times of super-high need that the spot
market guys get 30-40c/kWh and we get 4c? That's wrong, and is the
reason why we have no solar at all. Now it's too late, on account of a
new metal roof with a batten system.
> ... Heck, why have *any* surplus? Charge
> batteries when you have power to spare. Use the batteries to
> power *some* of your load in the off hours (instead of buying back
> the electricity that you just sold the utility a few hours ago
> AT A HIGHER PRICE -- "distribution costs")
>
Super expensive, not going to be economical. Friends had that in Mexico
and only because there was no electricity. You don't want to know what a
fully burdended kWh cost them.
>>> How much is a TV worth? When will you decide that 102" diag
>>> TV is "priced right"? Prices evolve. As does acceptance and
>>> desire for features/capabilities.
>>
>> Totally different thing. A 102" TV is bought because the neighbor just
>> got a 95" set and that peeved the other guy. Or it's football season. Or
>> whatever.
>>
>> HA, in contrast, is a business proposition just like TOU or solar is. If
>> it doesn't compute then people will not buy. Even I won't.
>
> I don't see it that way. For businesses, there is a value decision
> involved. For consumers, I still think there is a lot of "toy"
> factor. "Have you seen the Jones' house? It practically wipes
> your ass for you!"
>
For you and me, maybe (less so for me, I want value in it). But the vast
majority will not buy unless there is some payback.
>>> We've still decided cell phones are "too expensive" based on
>>> the level of use that they would see, here. Other folks spend
>>> $100+ a month. For a *phone*???
>>
>> Well, we have ours for emergencies and I do for business. Costs us
>> around $7/phone/mo. Worth it. We don't even use up the roughly 30mins/mo
>> that buys so they keep piling up.
>
> My other half has one "for emergencies". $100/year (I believe there
> are cheaper alternatives but she needed something that had widespread
> coverage as she was making annual drives up through some of the
> lesser populated/developed portions of the state, into Utah, etc.
> so that restricted her choices)
>
> She has *once* used it for an emergency. The other times have been
> "I'm at Trader Joe's. Do you want anything?"
>
> <shrug> At $100, it's a bargain for piece of mind... (also pays
> for itself when she *is* on those extended trips and would have to
> resort to a payphone or motel phone to call home)
>
When you get up there in age I'd consider getting one for yourself as
well. All it takes is going on a jog and suddenly you feel the ticker
skipping some beats.
>>>>> Question is whether you'll be strapped into a "subscription service"
>>>>> or able to manage and control these things "locally". (There is
>>>>> already a "dumb" service being advertised for $2/day to give you
>>>>> access to SOME of the kit in your house. How much automation
>>>>> could $700/year buy you?)
>>>>
>>>> Not gonna happen. That is the wrong approach for HA, unless it is
>>>> specialty stuff where feedback to a supplier is required (I've helped
>>>> design one of those).
>>>
>>> Already happening.
>>>
>>> <http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/04/26/att-launching-home-security-and-automation-service/2113511/>
>>>
>>
>> So AT&T wants to become another alarm company? <yawn>
>
> EVERYONE wants to be in the services business! I suspect we will
> see "subsidized appliances" in the future -- once they figure out
> how to get those appliances to snitch on your usage patterns!
> Then, sell that information to vendors who can pitch items to
> you *in* your home!
>
> (Like: "Free phone with 2 year contract...")
>
Smart phones have the coolness factor. "Mine has a screen 0.500" bigger
than yours" or "Mine can do LTE". HA (mostly) doesn't have this
coolness, it needs to create value on its own merits.
>>> <http://www.cedmagazine.com/articles/2012/04/home-automation-the-new-frontier-for-service-providers>
>>>
>>
>> Quote "but the base price starts at $39.95 a month plus an installation
>> fee" -> DOA.
>
> But it isn't! Folks are willing to pay for security monitoring
> services (surveillance), "Help, I've fallen and I can't get up",
> etc. It's a wonder anyone has disposable income given all the
> vendors trying to nickel and dime them to death! :<
>
They only do that if they really have no other choice. Or if the kids
force them to and/or pay the bills for it. We are talking home
automation though.
> (Most "services" are articifial. Why do I need to pay someone
> $2/day so I can control SOME of my appliances from my iPhone?
> Why can't my phone contact my home directly -- instead of
> going THROUGH your "service")
>
Exactly. I don't want to be tied to someone's service for this. Because
you know how it goes:
"We have some wonderful news! We have added these valuable features ...
yada, yada, yada ..."
None of which you really need, or let alone asked for. In the fine print
it says "Best of all, you get all this for a low new price of
$2.79/day". Seriously, I had exactly such an attempt by my web hoster
recently. I put an immediate stopperoo on that but I bet 90+ percent of
customers didn't and now wonder why their bill shot up.
>>> <http://www.homesecurityhomeautomation.com/>
>>>
>>> <http://www.in-homeautomation.com/>
>>>
>>> <http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2013/06/03/time-warner-launches-home-automation-service.html>
>>>
>>
>> Quote "The service requires Time Warner Cable’s Internet service and
>> costs $33.99 a month when bundled with cable TV or phone service. The
>> contract, which includes a security monitoring service, is for 18
>> months" ... You really believe that will fly? How on earth do they want
>> to catch someone like us who will not subscribe to their cable TV or
>> phone?
>
> The same sort of people who already spend $160/month! Companies
> don't care about you or me. There are plenty of other folks eager
> to throw money at them!
>
I doubt they would spend an additional $34/mo for that. For umpteen
additional sports channels, sure. For HA? Nope.
>>> FWIW, google would love to get into this! Not just see what
>>> you go looking for "on-line" but see what you *do* inside
>>> your home!
>>
>> So why don't they? They've got enough money. A few years ago they were
>> on the right track by starting an eneergy monitoring thing. But then
>> ditched it ...
>
> They've embraced Arduino in the hope that folks will design
> Arduino based gizmos... that they can eventually talk to.
That's nerd stuff, will never reach the masses.
> Google wants to *live* in your pants (pocket)!
>
Not in mine. I don't even use them as a search engine.
>>>> So where is reasonably priced product available, right now?
>>>
>>> Depends on what you consider "reasonable". E.g., I don't consider
>>> $3 for a single CAT5 keystone connector "reasonable". But,
>>> apparently, there are peole who *do* (because you see them sold at
>>> those prices and shelf stock varying over time)
>>
>> A keystone connector won't make home automation happen. That needs a lot
>> more stuff.
>
> Sure. My point was there are folks who are willing to pay that
> price for a flimsy little connector. What are they willing to
> pay for the rest of the enchilada?
>
Not much. They will prefer to spend that money on a fun park trip,
dinner, movies, a humongous gas barbecue they use exactly once, or some
other cool stuff they can brag about in front of their friends.
>>> Good luck with your tooth!
>>
>> Barbecue is off. We will eat soup tonight, can't chew anything :-(
>
> Bummer. Shit Happens.
>
Yeah, pain all day, dentist on vacation for a week. But my wife made an
excellent Zucchini soup. Someties us guys forget how much work that is,
a lot more than if I had barbecued the meat, sausages, bread and jalapenos.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-29 16:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <kt6ttv$cfk$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12828 |
Hi Joerg,
I see you are still among the living -- much to your displeasure! :>
On 7/29/2013 11:15 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>>> At least if the network goes down, I know in a matter of seconds!
>>>> (even if I am not home at the time)
>>>
>>> The advantage with the simple irrigation controller is that if it croaks
>>> while I am gone I can simply tell my wife where to get a new one and she
>>> can install it. With a problem somewhere in the LAN that would be a real
>>> challenge.
>>
>> What would she do if the hot water heater developed a leak?
>> I.e., you *fix* things that you rely on in a timely manner.
>
> She would have a new one installed. With a homebrew LAN that is kind of
> impossible.
But if this was a commercial product, she'd be able to buy a replacement
(or have a cold spare) just as easily as you currently can!
>> Unfortunately, many folks don't have a choice. Or, don't want to
>> give up their independence -- "yet". Our ALS friend lives by herself.
>> Despite the fact that she can no longer *speak*. We have friends
>> where one spouse is disabled -- and the other barely *able* (i.e.,
>> old). Try telling them "you should move into..." and its like
>> talking to a brick wall!
>>
>> [I wonder what I will be like when/if that time comes?]
>
> We never know. But it is beneficial to prepare oneself. Because of our
Yup. When our friend was Dx'ed with ALS, I ventured that she
should start planning her exit strategy while she was still
able to act on it. The idea wasn't well received at the time
(of course). Now, she is no longer capable of undertaking
that sort of preparation -- let alone follow-through! So, if
she gets to a point where she wants that sort of side exit,
she will have to impose on others (with legal and moral
implications!)
> volunteer activities we know most of the places in our area. It's good
> to mentally prepare. Of course that's no guarantee, I know people who in
> their younger years were perfectly willing to go into assisted living
> some day and then when the time really came fought it tooth and nail.
>>>>>>>> I think there will be a more in this direction RSN. There are
>>>>>>>> already firms touting "control your home from your iPhone"
>>>>>>>> (for only $60/month). When appliance manufacturers start
>>>>>>>> adopting integrated comms as a "standard feature", this will
>>>>>>>> get easier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They are touting since decade and nothing came of that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's because it is inevitable! The problem has been having a
>>>>>> public (consumer base) that is comfortable with this concept.
>>>>>> Willing to pay for it, not afraid of it, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, the problem is incompetence of marketing departments. Lots of
>>>>> people
>>>>> want this. When we showed our (less than reliable) X-10 stuff to people
>>>>> they absolutely wanted it. You and I can make a good quality PLC wall
>>>>> switch that retails for $19.95, but industry obviously can't.
>>>>
>>>> Industry wants early adopters to subsidize their entire development.
>>>
>>> That will never work.
>>
>> Happens all the time! Early adopters always pay through the nose!
>> I'm hoping that circumventing the need for "big players" will let
>> "tinkerers" create a workable system -- even if a big player comes
>> in after the fact and tries to hijack the idea. (who cares as long
>> as the devices are available!)
>
> It only tends to happen for gizmos in a "must have" category. HA isn't
> cool enough, therefore it has to be reasonably price to even create a
> market.
I dunno. Friends/neighbors to whom I've shown prototypes of some
of my features (i.e., crude implementations) are blown away by
the "magic". E.g., having music follow me through the house
so I don't have to turn off the "stereo" in this room before I
move into the next room... then, turn that one on (and find the
same source material in exactly the same point -- e.g., as
if the CD in this player was perfectly synchronized to the CD
in the player I just turned off). I imagine the impact when I
can sort out the video delivery will be equally impressive!
>> Its easier than that! You do the things that automation can't
>> (i.e. load the washer). Let the automation decide when to actually
>> *wash* the clothes. Let it notify you when you are needed to
>> move the clothes into the dryer, etc.
>
> But there is nothing available at Home Depot or Lowe's to make that
> happen. Consequently it's not happening.
Here are intelligent, networkable thermostats offered at Lowes.
With suitable changes to their algorithms and the availability
of real-time energy consumption data (electric/gas), they
could easily manage a large portion of a home's power needs
(air conditioning and heating)
[forgive teh broken lines... NNTP client complains! Too lazy to
"tiny-fy" them :< ]
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_86217-22742-T200577_0__?productId=3878572&
Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_333-352-TZEMT400BB32MAA_0__?productId=3382198&
Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_370567-74493-
YTH8320ZW1007_0__?productId=3501124&Ntt=thermostat&
pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_388565-69305-CT-101-L_0__?productId=3735317&
Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_171309-74493-
RTH8580WF1007_0__?productId=3850715&Ntt=thermostat&
pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_171234-74493-
RTH6580WF1001_0__?productId=3850713&Ntt=thermostat&
pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_486110-74493-
RTH9580WF1005_0__?productId=4746117&Ntt=thermostat&
pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
All claim to be "in stock".
Here are remote control "modules", (modern day X-10?) etc.:
<http://www.lowes.com/pd_380-352-RP200R_4294857038__?productId=3067237&
Ns=p_product_qty_sales_dollar|1>
<http://www.lowes.com
/pd_197357-1353-45603_4294857038__?productId=3167775&
Ns=p_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
pl=1¤tURL=%3FgoToProdList%3Dtrue%26Ns%3Dp_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
facetInfo=>
<http://www.lowes.com
/pd_193115-1353-45602_4294857038__?productId=3167765&
Ns=p_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
pl=1¤tURL=%3FgoToProdList%3Dtrue%26Ns%3Dp_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
facetInfo=>
If you are willing to shop at places other than just Lowes:
Here are 47 wall switches that you can talk to remotely:
<http://www.smarthome.com/_/Dimmers_Lighting_Appliance_Control
/Dimmers_Wall_Switches_Keypads_Touchscreens/Z_Wave_Compatible/_/z/1QV
/23V/nav.aspx>
Here are 8 "wall outlets":
<http://www.smarthome.com/_/Dimmers_Lighting_Appliance_Control
/Receptacles/Wire_in_Outlet_Modules/Z_Wave_Compatible/_/z/2ML/1Qb/23V
/nav.aspx>
And 32 "security:" products (door locks, thermostats, sensors):
<http://www.smarthome.com/_/Security/Z_Wave_Compatible/_/H/23V/nav.aspx>
Of course, all of those were Z-Wave comms technology. If you
prefer to use ZigBee, here are 17 products that try to manage
power to some degree:
<http://www.smarthome.com/_/Zigbee/_/2qD/nav.aspx>
If you're more of a nostalgia buff, there are still X10 products:
26 wall switches:
<http://www.smarthome.com/_/Dimmers_Wall_Switches_Keypads_Touchscreens
/X10_Compatible/_/1QV/23X/nav.aspx>
10 "wall wart" modules:
<http://www.smarthome.com/_/Plug_in_Screw_In_Modules/X10_Compatible
/_/1Qd/23X/nav.aspx>
LG claims a line of WiFi enabled appliances (washer/dryer.fridge/oven):
<http://www.lg.com/global/press-release/article/lg-unveils-total-
home-appliance-solution-empowering-consumers-to-smartly-manage-their-
homes.jsp>
<http://www.lgnewsroom.com/ces2012/view.php?product_code=95&
product_type=95&post_index=1828>
Sure, they are pricey. But, they represent a verified commitment
to a technology. Not like Detroit's "concept cars" that never
CLAIM to be producible but merely intended to generate "buzz"!
>> Of course, there are countless "rules" as to what it should do
>> and when. E.g., growing up, the hot water heater was undersized
>> (oil fired). So, you didn't take a shower when someone was
>> doing laundry!
>>
>> With automation, you can turn that on its head to favor the user
>> over the "appliance" -- *stop* the laundry cycle when someone
>> wants to use the shower (or, just delay when you would start the
>> cycle if you know folks will be taking showers, soon)
>
> Well, yeah, those things we tend to figure out the old-fashioned way by
> turning stuff on and off. For example, we set the sprinklers to come on
> and be through before we take our morning showers.
We have to water at different times during the day. E.g., the
roses won't tolerate missing an afternoon soak (in addition
to the wee-hours soak). And, when its windy, all bets are off!
I'd much prefer a system that can optimize when it *should* water
conditioned by monitoring our activities (i.e., presumably, our
needs are more important -- why should we have to change our
schedules to accommodate plants?)
>>> It's easy. But it will only work if the utilities or at least the public
>>> utilities commissions wisen up, and the HA industry gets into gear. In
>>> other words all that has to come together.
>>
>> You can save energy and gain convenience with automation. So,
>> use that as the "draw" and hope that others (utilities, regulators,
>> etc.) get on the bandwagon after-the-fact.
>
> Not going to work. There is no consumer payback without intelligent TOU
> tariffs. So consumers won't buy.
There are places where utilities *have* been smart, apparently,
in interacting with their consumers. E.g., SWMBO's parents
had a load shedding agreement with their provider ("cooperative")
that worked well for them.
But, most utilities are still in the greedy phase. Hoping to get
something for nothing. To actually use ToU to get *more* money
from their customers.
[When offered a ToU tariff, here, I carefully monitored out
consumption and realized we would be screwed big time. And,
we have very malleable schedules so we *could* shift a lot
of the load! Other folks would have discovered -- after the
fact -- that they could never conveniently shift enough
load to break even... let alone SAVE money! (Why else would
you want to switch to a different tariff?!]
>>>> If you can instrument these loads and give "something" control
>>>> over them, then you can more readily inspect their costs *and*
>>>> develop strategies to minimize those costs. E.g., use the swamp
>>>> cooler instead of the ACbrrr when you expect it to be reasonably
>>>> dry outside. Let the heat fall off as your "typical bedtime"
>>>> approaches (instead of casting that in concrete at a particular
>>>> time in a naive setback thermostat)
>>>
>>> Right. But there are no instruments.
>>
>> See some of my URLs. ...
>
> That's mostly alarm systems. Not very useful for real HA.
Check again. Along with the other devices I've described, here.
E.g., a refrigerator vendor knows what his appliance consumes.
And, can know what it as consumed *recently*.
Similarly, plugging a 100W lamp into a "lamp module" implicitly
tells you that every moment it is on consumes 100W.
(The problem is, you don't have anything with brains to
track this and do something with it!)
>> ... What's sorely missing is the smarts (algorithms)
>> to tie things together. "Control your home from your smartphone!"
>> "OK, besides being 1970 technology, what does that *do* for me that
>> I can't do WITHOUT the smartphone??" (i.e., why can't *you* decide
>> when to lower the thermostat?)
>
> First there needs to be the hardware, the devices that actually control
> stuff. They ain't there.
See the 100+ devices I cited above.
>> They want it all. They forget that *I* have to gain something
>> before I am willing to GIVE something!
>>
>> E.g., we have looked into PV solar (too expensive given our ages).
>> Going that route, you "sell back" surplus electricity (at a reduced
>> price!) to the utility. ...
>
> And therein lies the problem. Why is it that when we strain ourselves to
> be good and feed 8kW back at times of super-high need that the spot
> market guys get 30-40c/kWh and we get 4c? That's wrong, and is the
> reason why we have no solar at all. Now it's too late, on account of a
> new metal roof with a batten system.
Exactly.
Here, solar has taken a good foothold. In addition to all the
"solar pool heaters" (very old technology), I'm sure there are
at least 5000 sq ft of PV's within a block of our house.
(and those are all residential installs).
If you look at the commercial establishments, the deployment
of solar has been astonishing! E.g., parking lot "carports"
(areas where dozens of cars can park under a standalone "roof")
with 1000sq ft or more of PVs.
There's a little house down the road from here that has the
entire roof surface covered in PVs!
We entertained solar *water* heater but at $5K+ it was a joke!
Ditto with on-demand.
"And, when the controller board craps out, the *plumber* is
going to repair it? Oh, it's going to be a $100 service call
and a board swap. So, several hundred dollars -- instead of
just purchasing a new *gas/electric* heater every 15 years??"
>> ... Heck, why have *any* surplus? Charge
>> batteries when you have power to spare. Use the batteries to
>> power *some* of your load in the off hours (instead of buying back
>> the electricity that you just sold the utility a few hours ago
>> AT A HIGHER PRICE -- "distribution costs")
>
> Super expensive, not going to be economical. Friends had that in Mexico
> and only because there was no electricity. You don't want to know what a
> fully burdended kWh cost them.
Of course. But you could pump water uphill, etc. And, if you
invested in a cooperative effort in the neighborhood, you could
pool a fair bit of "power" -- instead of giving it away (and
buying it back a few hours later).
E.g., I have a small PV panel that I use to keep a small bank
of car batteries topped off in the garage. They run a pump
that I use to harvest rainwater (silly to pay for electricity
to conserve water!). And, I have a 1500VA inverter nearby so
I have a decent source of power (lighting, etc.) in the event of
a prolonged outage (without having to buy more expensive
batteries suitable for use indoors!)
>> <shrug> At $100, it's a bargain for piece of mind... (also pays
>> for itself when she *is* on those extended trips and would have to
>> resort to a payphone or motel phone to call home)
>
> When you get up there in age I'd consider getting one for yourself as
> well. All it takes is going on a jog and suddenly you feel the ticker
> skipping some beats.
I have a (very) long range cordless phone that I carry while
walking. E.g., I can reach the house (as an intercom) from
almost anywhere in the neighborhood (furthest corner is
about half a mile). Once I get an antenna on the roof
(instead of in the closet!), I imagine there will be no
dead spots.
>>> Quote "The service requires Time Warner Cable’s Internet service and
>>> costs $33.99 a month when bundled with cable TV or phone service. The
>>> contract, which includes a security monitoring service, is for 18
>>> months" ... You really believe that will fly? How on earth do they want
>>> to catch someone like us who will not subscribe to their cable TV or
>>> phone?
>>
>> The same sort of people who already spend $160/month! Companies
>> don't care about you or me. There are plenty of other folks eager
>> to throw money at them!
>
> I doubt they would spend an additional $34/mo for that. For umpteen
> additional sports channels, sure. For HA? Nope.
People here already spend that much for "security monitoring"
services. E.g., a bunch of PIr's and a panic button wired to
a phone line.
>>> Barbecue is off. We will eat soup tonight, can't chew anything :-(
>>
>> Bummer. Shit Happens.
>
> Yeah, pain all day, dentist on vacation for a week. But my wife made an
> excellent Zucchini soup. Someties us guys forget how much work that is,
> a lot more than if I had barbecued the meat, sausages, bread and jalapenos.
Jinx. SWMBO now has a problem. I will *thank* her for you! :>
(Pour yourself a cold one and try to forget about it!)
--don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-29 17:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b5og7sFo0h7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #12838 |
Don Y wrote:
> Hi Joerg,
>
> I see you are still among the living -- much to your displeasure! :>
>
Drowsy from the pain pills for the tooth ache:-(
> On 7/29/2013 11:15 AM, Joerg wrote:
>
>>>>> At least if the network goes down, I know in a matter of seconds!
>>>>> (even if I am not home at the time)
>>>>
>>>> The advantage with the simple irrigation controller is that if it
>>>> croaks
>>>> while I am gone I can simply tell my wife where to get a new one and
>>>> she
>>>> can install it. With a problem somewhere in the LAN that would be a
>>>> real
>>>> challenge.
>>>
>>> What would she do if the hot water heater developed a leak?
>>> I.e., you *fix* things that you rely on in a timely manner.
>>
>> She would have a new one installed. With a homebrew LAN that is kind of
>> impossible.
>
> But if this was a commercial product, she'd be able to buy a replacement
> (or have a cold spare) just as easily as you currently can!
>
But all your IP "peel-off" boxes are not available commercially.
Technically I see no major problems but logistically I do.
>>> Unfortunately, many folks don't have a choice. Or, don't want to
>>> give up their independence -- "yet". Our ALS friend lives by herself.
>>> Despite the fact that she can no longer *speak*. We have friends
>>> where one spouse is disabled -- and the other barely *able* (i.e.,
>>> old). Try telling them "you should move into..." and its like
>>> talking to a brick wall!
>>>
>>> [I wonder what I will be like when/if that time comes?]
>>
>> We never know. But it is beneficial to prepare oneself. Because of our
>
> Yup. When our friend was Dx'ed with ALS, I ventured that she
> should start planning her exit strategy while she was still
> able to act on it. The idea wasn't well received at the time
> (of course). Now, she is no longer capable of undertaking
> that sort of preparation -- let alone follow-through! So, if
> she gets to a point where she wants that sort of side exit,
> she will have to impose on others (with legal and moral
> implications!)
>
She should at least execute a medical directive. That is what friends
with a similar predicament did a long time ago.
[...]
>> It only tends to happen for gizmos in a "must have" category. HA isn't
>> cool enough, therefore it has to be reasonably price to even create a
>> market.
>
> I dunno. Friends/neighbors to whom I've shown prototypes of some
> of my features (i.e., crude implementations) are blown away by
> the "magic". E.g., having music follow me through the house
> so I don't have to turn off the "stereo" in this room before I
> move into the next room... then, turn that one on (and find the
> same source material in exactly the same point -- e.g., as
> if the CD in this player was perfectly synchronized to the CD
> in the player I just turned off). I imagine the impact when I
> can sort out the video delivery will be equally impressive!
>
Sure, but ask them what they'd be willing to fork over in Dollars for
this. Because they will put this in relation to the novelty factor other
stuff brings, and to what they paid there. Like that $200 smart phone
(not realizing that they pay the other $300 via the 2-year plan).
>>> Its easier than that! You do the things that automation can't
>>> (i.e. load the washer). Let the automation decide when to actually
>>> *wash* the clothes. Let it notify you when you are needed to
>>> move the clothes into the dryer, etc.
>>
>> But there is nothing available at Home Depot or Lowe's to make that
>> happen. Consequently it's not happening.
>
> Here are intelligent, networkable thermostats offered at Lowes.
> With suitable changes to their algorithms and the availability
> of real-time energy consumption data (electric/gas), they
> could easily manage a large portion of a home's power needs
> (air conditioning and heating)
>
> [forgive teh broken lines... NNTP client complains! Too lazy to
> "tiny-fy" them :< ]
>
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_86217-22742-T200577_0__?productId=3878572&
> Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
250 bucks for a thermostat? Are they crazy?
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_333-352-TZEMT400BB32MAA_0__?productId=3382198&
> Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
$150 is high, plus looks like proprietary network. Not for me.
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_370567-74493-
> YTH8320ZW1007_0__?productId=3501124&Ntt=thermostat&
> pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
$160 plus you need to buy a Z-wave controller.
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_388565-69305-CT-101-L_0__?productId=3735317&
> Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
Must buy the IRIS system and that offer next to nothing in real home
automation:
http://www.lowes.com/cd_Starter+Kits_663889394_#1-Comparison
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_171309-74493-
> RTH8580WF1007_0__?productId=3850715&Ntt=thermostat&
> pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_171234-74493-
> RTH6580WF1001_0__?productId=3850713&Ntt=thermostat&
> pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_486110-74493-
> RTH9580WF1005_0__?productId=4746117&Ntt=thermostat&
> pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=>
>
> All claim to be "in stock".
>
Yeah, but this stuff does not cut it. It is not true home automation.
> Here are remote control "modules", (modern day X-10?) etc.:
>
> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_380-352-RP200R_4294857038__?productId=3067237&
> Ns=p_product_qty_sales_dollar|1>
>
$35 is high but could be (somewhat) ok. But Z-wave has serious range
issues. It only works if you buy enough stuff or use repeaters. Then
under specs ... "UL Safety Listing .. No" -> Oops.
> <http://www.lowes.com
> /pd_197357-1353-45603_4294857038__?productId=3167775&
> Ns=p_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
> pl=1¤tURL=%3FgoToProdList%3Dtrue%26Ns%3Dp_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
> facetInfo=>
>
$50 is too much.
> <http://www.lowes.com
> /pd_193115-1353-45602_4294857038__?productId=3167765&
> Ns=p_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
> pl=1¤tURL=%3FgoToProdList%3Dtrue%26Ns%3Dp_product_qty_sales_dollar|1&
> facetInfo=>
>
Quote "This module is for use with standard incandescent lighting, 300W
maximum load" ... uhm, whom are they trying to fool? That is so last
century, sounds like gussied-up X-10. Except that my X-10 modules have
cost less than 20%. The fact that they can only operate incandescents is
one of the major shortcomings of that system. Edison bulbs are mega-out
these days.
> If you are willing to shop at places other than just Lowes:
>
> Here are 47 wall switches that you can talk to remotely:
>
Well, yeah, at boutique prices. That is the problem (plus to some extent
the Z-wave range).
> <http://www.smarthome.com/_/Dimmers_Lighting_Appliance_Control
> /Dimmers_Wall_Switches_Keypads_Touchscreens/Z_Wave_Compatible/_/z/1QV
> /23V/nav.aspx>
>
> Here are 8 "wall outlets":
>
> <http://www.smarthome.com/_/Dimmers_Lighting_Appliance_Control
> /Receptacles/Wire_in_Outlet_Modules/Z_Wave_Compatible/_/z/2ML/1Qb/23V
> /nav.aspx>
>
> And 32 "security:" products (door locks, thermostats, sensors):
>
> <http://www.smarthome.com/_/Security/Z_Wave_Compatible/_/H/23V/nav.aspx>
>
> Of course, all of those were Z-Wave comms technology. If you
> prefer to use ZigBee, here are 17 products that try to manage
> power to some degree:
>
> <http://www.smarthome.com/_/Zigbee/_/2qD/nav.aspx>
>
> If you're more of a nostalgia buff, there are still X10 products:
>
> 26 wall switches:
>
> <http://www.smarthome.com/_/Dimmers_Wall_Switches_Keypads_Touchscreens
> /X10_Compatible/_/1QV/23X/nav.aspx>
>
> 10 "wall wart" modules:
>
> <http://www.smarthome.com/_/Plug_in_Screw_In_Modules/X10_Compatible
> /_/1Qd/23X/nav.aspx>
>
We have lots of X-10. It's not reliable and mostly of poor quality.
> LG claims a line of WiFi enabled appliances (washer/dryer.fridge/oven):
>
> <http://www.lg.com/global/press-release/article/lg-unveils-total-
> home-appliance-solution-empowering-consumers-to-smartly-manage-their-
> homes.jsp>
>
> <http://www.lgnewsroom.com/ces2012/view.php?product_code=95&
> product_type=95&post_index=1828>
>
> Sure, they are pricey. But, they represent a verified commitment
> to a technology. Not like Detroit's "concept cars" that never
> CLAIM to be producible but merely intended to generate "buzz"!
>
I have to disagree with you on that. HA to me is something totally
different. Not super-expensive gear where I can beam a recipe to the
oven but gear where I can control outdoor lights, media, coffee makers,
mood lighting, has sensors and so on.
>>> Of course, there are countless "rules" as to what it should do
>>> and when. E.g., growing up, the hot water heater was undersized
>>> (oil fired). So, you didn't take a shower when someone was
>>> doing laundry!
>>>
>>> With automation, you can turn that on its head to favor the user
>>> over the "appliance" -- *stop* the laundry cycle when someone
>>> wants to use the shower (or, just delay when you would start the
>>> cycle if you know folks will be taking showers, soon)
>>
>> Well, yeah, those things we tend to figure out the old-fashioned way by
>> turning stuff on and off. For example, we set the sprinklers to come on
>> and be through before we take our morning showers.
>
> We have to water at different times during the day. E.g., the
> roses won't tolerate missing an afternoon soak (in addition
> to the wee-hours soak). And, when its windy, all bets are off!
>
> I'd much prefer a system that can optimize when it *should* water
> conditioned by monitoring our activities (i.e., presumably, our
> needs are more important -- why should we have to change our
> schedules to accommodate plants?)
>
That requires real HA, not just the gizmos. The system would need to
learn your habits. The sensors are fairly easy but, as usual,
unobtanium. For example, a water meter link or flow sensor can provide
enough information to figure out "Oh, someone is taking a shower".
>>>> It's easy. But it will only work if the utilities or at least the
>>>> public
>>>> utilities commissions wisen up, and the HA industry gets into gear. In
>>>> other words all that has to come together.
>>>
>>> You can save energy and gain convenience with automation. So,
>>> use that as the "draw" and hope that others (utilities, regulators,
>>> etc.) get on the bandwagon after-the-fact.
>>
>> Not going to work. There is no consumer payback without intelligent TOU
>> tariffs. So consumers won't buy.
>
> There are places where utilities *have* been smart, apparently,
> in interacting with their consumers. E.g., SWMBO's parents
> had a load shedding agreement with their provider ("cooperative")
> that worked well for them.
>
> But, most utilities are still in the greedy phase. Hoping to get
> something for nothing. To actually use ToU to get *more* money
> from their customers.
>
Customers like us see right through that.
> [When offered a ToU tariff, here, I carefully monitored out
> consumption and realized we would be screwed big time. And,
> we have very malleable schedules so we *could* shift a lot
> of the load! Other folks would have discovered -- after the
> fact -- that they could never conveniently shift enough
> load to break even... let alone SAVE money! (Why else would
> you want to switch to a different tariff?!]
>
Exactamente. Same here.
>>>>> If you can instrument these loads and give "something" control
>>>>> over them, then you can more readily inspect their costs *and*
>>>>> develop strategies to minimize those costs. E.g., use the swamp
>>>>> cooler instead of the ACbrrr when you expect it to be reasonably
>>>>> dry outside. Let the heat fall off as your "typical bedtime"
>>>>> approaches (instead of casting that in concrete at a particular
>>>>> time in a naive setback thermostat)
>>>>
>>>> Right. But there are no instruments.
>>>
>>> See some of my URLs. ...
>>
>> That's mostly alarm systems. Not very useful for real HA.
>
> Check again. Along with the other devices I've described, here.
> E.g., a refrigerator vendor knows what his appliance consumes.
> And, can know what it as consumed *recently*.
>
> Similarly, plugging a 100W lamp into a "lamp module" implicitly
> tells you that every moment it is on consumes 100W.
>
That's not it. One must monitor the whole house and deduce from
consumption patterns what is what. Like what does it look like when
someone takes a shower? What does it look like if a pizza is baked in
the oven? Those are heavy-hitters in consumption.
> (The problem is, you don't have anything with brains to
> track this and do something with it!)
>
That's what real HA would do. It has brains. For example, our X10 has a
uC plus radio sticking in a central locatin. But it is totally
underpowered and not smart enough.
>>> ... What's sorely missing is the smarts (algorithms)
>>> to tie things together. "Control your home from your smartphone!"
>>> "OK, besides being 1970 technology, what does that *do* for me that
>>> I can't do WITHOUT the smartphone??" (i.e., why can't *you* decide
>>> when to lower the thermostat?)
>>
>> First there needs to be the hardware, the devices that actually control
>> stuff. They ain't there.
>
> See the 100+ devices I cited above.
>
To be honest, they do not impress me. Some are same old same old, others
are over-priced.
>>> They want it all. They forget that *I* have to gain something
>>> before I am willing to GIVE something!
>>>
>>> E.g., we have looked into PV solar (too expensive given our ages).
>>> Going that route, you "sell back" surplus electricity (at a reduced
>>> price!) to the utility. ...
>>
>> And therein lies the problem. Why is it that when we strain ourselves to
>> be good and feed 8kW back at times of super-high need that the spot
>> market guys get 30-40c/kWh and we get 4c? That's wrong, and is the
>> reason why we have no solar at all. Now it's too late, on account of a
>> new metal roof with a batten system.
>
> Exactly.
>
> Here, solar has taken a good foothold. In addition to all the
> "solar pool heaters" (very old technology), I'm sure there are
> at least 5000 sq ft of PV's within a block of our house.
> (and those are all residential installs).
>
Not sure where you live. Last time I flew to San Diego (few weeks ago) I
scanned the neighborhoods from above. I was very surprised how little
there was in solar installations. There were whole blocks where nobody
had solar.
> If you look at the commercial establishments, the deployment
> of solar has been astonishing! E.g., parking lot "carports"
> (areas where dozens of cars can park under a standalone "roof")
> with 1000sq ft or more of PVs.
>
Not in San Diego, where after shutting down the San Onofre plant they'd
really need it.
> There's a little house down the road from here that has the
> entire roof surface covered in PVs!
>
> We entertained solar *water* heater but at $5K+ it was a joke!
> Ditto with on-demand.
>
> "And, when the controller board craps out, the *plumber* is
> going to repair it? Oh, it's going to be a $100 service call
> and a board swap. So, several hundred dollars -- instead of
> just purchasing a new *gas/electric* heater every 15 years??"
>
Yup. If the electronics goes bad they'll likely fleece you unless you
can find out with a sharp eye that it's a particular electrolytic that
went bad. Or in my recent case an inadequately cooled linear regulator
went phut.
>>> ... Heck, why have *any* surplus? Charge
>>> batteries when you have power to spare. Use the batteries to
>>> power *some* of your load in the off hours (instead of buying back
>>> the electricity that you just sold the utility a few hours ago
>>> AT A HIGHER PRICE -- "distribution costs")
>>
>> Super expensive, not going to be economical. Friends had that in Mexico
>> and only because there was no electricity. You don't want to know what a
>> fully burdended kWh cost them.
>
> Of course. But you could pump water uphill, etc. And, if you
> invested in a cooperative effort in the neighborhood, you could
> pool a fair bit of "power" -- instead of giving it away (and
> buying it back a few hours later).
>
They'd have to build a hill first :-)
> E.g., I have a small PV panel that I use to keep a small bank
> of car batteries topped off in the garage. They run a pump
> that I use to harvest rainwater (silly to pay for electricity
> to conserve water!). And, I have a 1500VA inverter nearby so
> I have a decent source of power (lighting, etc.) in the event of
> a prolonged outage (without having to buy more expensive
> batteries suitable for use indoors!)
>
I thought about that. Harborfreight's 45W panel was down to $150 last
time I looked. Still a bit high.
[...]
>
>>>> Quote "The service requires Time Warner Cable’s Internet service and
>>>> costs $33.99 a month when bundled with cable TV or phone service. The
>>>> contract, which includes a security monitoring service, is for 18
>>>> months" ... You really believe that will fly? How on earth do they want
>>>> to catch someone like us who will not subscribe to their cable TV or
>>>> phone?
>>>
>>> The same sort of people who already spend $160/month! Companies
>>> don't care about you or me. There are plenty of other folks eager
>>> to throw money at them!
>>
>> I doubt they would spend an additional $34/mo for that. For umpteen
>> additional sports channels, sure. For HA? Nope.
>
> People here already spend that much for "security monitoring"
> services. E.g., a bunch of PIr's and a panic button wired to
> a phone line.
>
If HA gets tacked on then the monthly charge will be upped, big time.
Out here it's cheaper, unless you have them install an elaborate alarm
system which must be amortized.
>>>> Barbecue is off. We will eat soup tonight, can't chew anything :-(
>>>
>>> Bummer. Shit Happens.
>>
>> Yeah, pain all day, dentist on vacation for a week. But my wife made an
>> excellent Zucchini soup. Someties us guys forget how much work that is,
>> a lot more than if I had barbecued the meat, sausages, bread and
>> jalapenos.
>
> Jinx. SWMBO now has a problem. I will *thank* her for you! :>
>
> (Pour yourself a cold one and try to forget about it!)
>
Oh yeah, we sure will :-)
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-29 21:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <kt7gdi$luq$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12840 |
Hi Joerg, On 7/29/2013 5:38 PM, Joerg wrote: >> I see you are still among the living -- much to your displeasure! :> > > Drowsy from the pain pills for the tooth ache:-( Thankfully, I don't need pain relief often. E.g., a bottle of Advil will last us *years*! But, apparently, different types of pain are susceptible to different types of pain remedies. E.g., certain things don't work on teeth... >>>> What would she do if the hot water heater developed a leak? >>>> I.e., you *fix* things that you rely on in a timely manner. >>> >>> She would have a new one installed. With a homebrew LAN that is kind of >>> impossible. >> >> But if this was a commercial product, she'd be able to buy a replacement >> (or have a cold spare) just as easily as you currently can! > > But all your IP "peel-off" boxes are not available commercially. > Technically I see no major problems but logistically I do. Yes, but someone has to start the process! :> It sure isn't going to be a PLUMBER who does it! > She should at least execute a medical directive. That is what friends > with a similar predicament did a long time ago. EVERYONE should have health care power of attorney, etc. Not just people who seem *likely* to die. And, an "advocate" who will aggressively enforce teh terms of those directives. [we know folks who've had DNR's ignored, "conveniently"] >> I dunno. Friends/neighbors to whom I've shown prototypes of some >> of my features (i.e., crude implementations) are blown away by >> the "magic". E.g., having music follow me through the house >> so I don't have to turn off the "stereo" in this room before I >> move into the next room... then, turn that one on (and find the >> same source material in exactly the same point -- e.g., as >> if the CD in this player was perfectly synchronized to the CD >> in the player I just turned off). I imagine the impact when I >> can sort out the video delivery will be equally impressive! > > Sure, but ask them what they'd be willing to fork over in Dollars for > this. Because they will put this in relation to the novelty factor other > stuff brings, and to what they paid there. Like that $200 smart phone > (not realizing that they pay the other $300 via the 2-year plan). That;s obviously how vendors want to pitch their "systems"... $X/month (and *they* "eat" the cost of the kit... hence wanting it to be dirt cheap to produce!) >>> But there is nothing available at Home Depot or Lowe's to make that >>> happen. Consequently it's not happening. >> >> Here are intelligent, networkable thermostats offered at Lowes. >> With suitable changes to their algorithms and the availability >> of real-time energy consumption data (electric/gas), they >> could easily manage a large portion of a home's power needs >> (air conditioning and heating) >> >> [forgive teh broken lines... NNTP client complains! Too lazy to >> "tiny-fy" them :< ] >> >> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_86217-22742-T200577_0__?productId=3878572& >> Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=> > > 250 bucks for a thermostat? Are they crazy? [snip rest of examples as we agree on the insanity of the prices, etc.] The "Nest" device is actually pretty sexxy. But, yes, $250 is ridiculous. Even some of the cheaper units are $150, etc. They are stuck in that they need to make the device "unique" (e.g., it has a really slick user interface) so it *looks* like it is worth that money. They have much smaller quantities than generic thermostats. And *way* higher costs! (since a thermostat is a no-brainer to design electromechanically... even electronically!) They also have a fair bit of real estate on the store floor (large display -- ever wonder why breakfast cereal is as expensive as STEAK??) Curiously, there is actually an *advantage* to making the price higher! "Perception". I.e., folks tend to think more expensive things are *worth* more. (It also gives them more leeway to reduce the price over time) [I read a couple of texts, recently, that tried to describe how we perceive value, why we pay what we pay, etc. It was interesting in that it addressed all sorts of "things" that we "invest in" -- e.g., religion! And, why religions that demand a lot from their adherents tend to have more committed devotees (they've got more *invested*! More reason to *want* to believe!)] > Yeah, but this stuff does not cut it. It is not true home automation. Remember that thought... :> > I have to disagree with you on that. HA to me is something totally > different. Not super-expensive gear where I can beam a recipe to the > oven but gear where I can control outdoor lights, media, coffee makers, > mood lighting, has sensors and so on. Exactly. And, more! (below) >> I'd much prefer a system that can optimize when it *should* water >> conditioned by monitoring our activities (i.e., presumably, our >> needs are more important -- why should we have to change our >> schedules to accommodate plants?) > > That requires real HA, not just the gizmos. The system would need to > learn your habits. The sensors are fairly easy but, as usual, > unobtanium. For example, a water meter link or flow sensor can provide > enough information to figure out "Oh, someone is taking a shower". Ah, gwasshoppa... now you see! :> Hence the task I have set for myself! It's too "broad" for an appliance/device manufacturer. Dealing with security devices, HVAC, electric/gas/water utilities, household appliances, etc. And, to be done effectively, requires a pretty high level of "instrumentation saturation" -- you can't just automate the lighting, etc. So, "customers" need to make a significant commitment -- *or* the hooks have to already be IN PLACE for all these things. I.e., an interface that's already present on each of your appliances, control systems, etc. just WAITING to be used. And, for a "tinkerer", it requires a wide knowledge/experience base. Hardware design (analog and digital interfaces to sensors and actuators), software design (OS's, comms, applications, etc.), a feel for what the user is likely to accept as an interface, a sense for cost and packaging (since you won't be building it out of discarded PC's), etc. So, there is a huge startup cost, up front. Intimidating to most folks busy in a 9-to-5. OTOH, once a framework is available and demonstrably running, relatively easy for folks to tinker around the edges. "I designed an interface for a GE Model F1234 refrigerator." "I wrote a driver for a Bosch G4433 dishwasher." "I wrote an app that talks to the generic 'furnace' interface and controls indoor temperature" "I've added support for the Latvian language" Most folks can't "create". But, are very adept at tweeking an existing/proven design to make it do something else (or *better*!) But, they have to have someplace from which to start! >> Similarly, plugging a 100W lamp into a "lamp module" implicitly >> tells you that every moment it is on consumes 100W. > > That's not it. One must monitor the whole house and deduce from > consumption patterns what is what. Like what does it look like when > someone takes a shower? What does it look like if a pizza is baked in > the oven? Those are heavy-hitters in consumption. Exactly. Turning appliances on and off from your smartphone is just an expensive version of 1970's technology (I had an aunt who could turn any light in her home on/off from her bed -- and the system was installed in 1950! But, in the living room, she could only turn on the living room light! :< ) Until you have a framework in place, you can't begin to come up with the myriad different "things" it can do for you! (Instead of just streaming live video from the front doorway to a TV monitor, why not recognize the face: "Bob is at the front door. Do you want him to know you are home? Or, should I just tell him no one is here and he can leave a video message for you?" Or, maybe even let him *in* to pick up something that you have left for him -- but if he shows up at any other time, he's treated like a generic visitor) >> Here, solar has taken a good foothold. In addition to all the >> "solar pool heaters" (very old technology), I'm sure there are >> at least 5000 sq ft of PV's within a block of our house. >> (and those are all residential installs). > > Not sure where you live. Last time I flew to San Diego (few weeks ago) I > scanned the neighborhoods from above. I was very surprised how little > there was in solar installations. There were whole blocks where nobody > had solar. So. AZ. A modest, middle-class neighborhood. Nothing excessive. I am really surprised at how much solar I see! It seems like it would be too soon to iron out the bugs. (One of the neighbors has a large, *planar* array -- i.e., not "staggered" like sawteeth. Of course, the north edge is the "high side". Probably at least a 10 ft rise. Which means he's got a 20ft wide, many hundred square foot *sail* ready to catch the microbursts that blow in from the NORTH! :-/ It will be interesting to see if the array survives. *And*, if it peels the roof off his house in the process!!) >> We entertained solar *water* heater but at $5K+ it was a joke! >> Ditto with on-demand. >> >> "And, when the controller board craps out, the *plumber* is >> going to repair it? Oh, it's going to be a $100 service call >> and a board swap. So, several hundred dollars -- instead of >> just purchasing a new *gas/electric* heater every 15 years??" > > Yup. If the electronics goes bad they'll likely fleece you unless you > can find out with a sharp eye that it's a particular electrolytic that > went bad. Or in my recent case an inadequately cooled linear regulator > went phut. Exactly. It's like having an auto mechanic servicing your refrigerator. WTF?? >> E.g., I have a small PV panel that I use to keep a small bank >> of car batteries topped off in the garage. They run a pump >> that I use to harvest rainwater (silly to pay for electricity >> to conserve water!). And, I have a 1500VA inverter nearby so >> I have a decent source of power (lighting, etc.) in the event of >> a prolonged outage (without having to buy more expensive >> batteries suitable for use indoors!) > > I thought about that. Harborfreight's 45W panel was down to $150 last > time I looked. Still a bit high. I salvaged a bunch of tiny panels. Note that I have several days of sunlight to recharge the battery between rain storms (which is when I would nominally need the pump). The inverter is just gravy for those times when it *won't* be raining (i.e., 90% of the year!) (also handy when a car needs a "jump". Since we can expect batteries to die pretty regularly, here, you have to *plan* on it! At least they don't die and leave us trapped in the *snow*! :> ) --don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-30 12:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b5qi0oF7475U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #12843 |
Don Y wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > On 7/29/2013 5:38 PM, Joerg wrote: [...] >> But all your IP "peel-off" boxes are not available commercially. >> Technically I see no major problems but logistically I do. > > Yes, but someone has to start the process! :> It sure isn't > going to be a PLUMBER who does it! > Unless someone barges into the market with loss tenders or super-aggressive pricing it will remain a niche. [...] >>>> But there is nothing available at Home Depot or Lowe's to make that >>>> happen. Consequently it's not happening. >>> >>> Here are intelligent, networkable thermostats offered at Lowes. >>> With suitable changes to their algorithms and the availability >>> of real-time energy consumption data (electric/gas), they >>> could easily manage a large portion of a home's power needs >>> (air conditioning and heating) >>> >>> [forgive teh broken lines... NNTP client complains! Too lazy to >>> "tiny-fy" them :< ] >>> >>> <http://www.lowes.com/pd_86217-22742-T200577_0__?productId=3878572& >>> Ntt=thermostat&pl=1¤tURL=%3FNtt%3Dthermostat&facetInfo=> >> >> 250 bucks for a thermostat? Are they crazy? > > [snip rest of examples as we agree on the insanity of the prices, etc.] > > The "Nest" device is actually pretty sexxy. But, yes, $250 is > ridiculous. Even some of the cheaper units are $150, etc. > They'd have to offer a real starter kit for $99 or so, something that gets people hooked. It has to be able to control stuff that's otherwise difficult to control, such as outdoor lighting. And no forcing into monthly deals. From there on it'll become a self-starter but unfortunately industry does not understand. Think about Malibu lights. Everyone waits for the sale and then buys one or two boxes of 20 each, at $19.95 or sometimes a little more. Those contain the lights, wire and a transformer with a (lousy quality) timer in there. Then people get hooked and come back for more. That fancy flood light for the plum tree, multi-color lights, and so on. Some later get turned off because of the miserable quality of the timers. > They are stuck in that they need to make the device "unique" > (e.g., it has a really slick user interface) so it *looks* > like it is worth that money. They have much smaller quantities > than generic thermostats. And *way* higher costs! (since a > thermostat is a no-brainer to design electromechanically... > even electronically!) > Then they need better engineering teams. I have designed similar stuff and it is not expensive. One has to resist the temptation to make custom LCD displays and stuff, it's not necessary. Keep it simple. > They also have a fair bit of real estate on the store floor > (large display -- ever wonder why breakfast cereal is as > expensive as STEAK??) > > Curiously, there is actually an *advantage* to making the > price higher! "Perception". I.e., folks tend to think > more expensive things are *worth* more. (It also gives > them more leeway to reduce the price over time) > That is guaranteed to fail in HA. And it has for decades. > [I read a couple of texts, recently, that tried to describe > how we perceive value, why we pay what we pay, etc. It was > interesting in that it addressed all sorts of "things" that > we "invest in" -- e.g., religion! And, why religions that > demand a lot from their adherents tend to have more committed > devotees (they've got more *invested*! More reason to *want* > to believe!)] > That only works with a small subset of the population these days. >> Yeah, but this stuff does not cut it. It is not true home automation. > > Remember that thought... :> > >> I have to disagree with you on that. HA to me is something totally >> different. Not super-expensive gear where I can beam a recipe to the >> oven but gear where I can control outdoor lights, media, coffee makers, >> mood lighting, has sensors and so on. > > Exactly. And, more! (below) > >>> I'd much prefer a system that can optimize when it *should* water >>> conditioned by monitoring our activities (i.e., presumably, our >>> needs are more important -- why should we have to change our >>> schedules to accommodate plants?) >> >> That requires real HA, not just the gizmos. The system would need to >> learn your habits. The sensors are fairly easy but, as usual, >> unobtanium. For example, a water meter link or flow sensor can provide >> enough information to figure out "Oh, someone is taking a shower". > > Ah, gwasshoppa... now you see! :> Hence the task I have set for > myself! > > It's too "broad" for an appliance/device manufacturer. ... Then they should leave the biz and maybe start mass-producing muffins or something :-) > ... Dealing > with security devices, HVAC, electric/gas/water utilities, > household appliances, etc. And, to be done effectively, requires > a pretty high level of "instrumentation saturation" -- you can't > just automate the lighting, etc. ... Sure you can. I have done it here but all I had available was the crummy and unreliable X10 "system". It did all I wanted from it but the modules fell apart, comms broke down, et cetera. It's easy, if the hardware and the protocol would not be so poor. > ... So, "customers" need to make > a significant commitment -- *or* the hooks have to already > be IN PLACE for all these things. I.e., an interface that's > already present on each of your appliances, control systems, > etc. just WAITING to be used. > Nah. Start with outdoor lighting. Then indoor lighting, then include the furnace, then offer an Internet link, and by that time you'll be in business. Because people "must have" it. > And, for a "tinkerer", it requires a wide knowledge/experience > base. Hardware design (analog and digital interfaces to sensors > and actuators), software design (OS's, comms, applications, etc.), > a feel for what the user is likely to accept as an interface, > a sense for cost and packaging (since you won't be building it > out of discarded PC's), etc. > > So, there is a huge startup cost, up front. Intimidating to most > folks busy in a 9-to-5. > > OTOH, once a framework is available and demonstrably running, > relatively easy for folks to tinker around the edges. > > "I designed an interface for a GE Model F1234 refrigerator." > "I wrote a driver for a Bosch G4433 dishwasher." > "I wrote an app that talks to the generic 'furnace' interface > and controls indoor temperature" > "I've added support for the Latvian language" > > Most folks can't "create". But, are very adept at tweeking > an existing/proven design to make it do something else (or > *better*!) > > But, they have to have someplace from which to start! > Right, and that's hardware. All one has to do is this: Take all the X10 stuff, develop a transmission protocol that works, then develop the hardware in a more reliable fashion. Run through UL. That's it. Now offer through Amazon, Home Depot, Lowe's and later maybe Costco, Sam's Club, Walmart. >>> Similarly, plugging a 100W lamp into a "lamp module" implicitly >>> tells you that every moment it is on consumes 100W. >> >> That's not it. One must monitor the whole house and deduce from >> consumption patterns what is what. Like what does it look like when >> someone takes a shower? What does it look like if a pizza is baked in >> the oven? Those are heavy-hitters in consumption. > > Exactly. Turning appliances on and off from your smartphone > is just an expensive version of 1970's technology (I had an aunt > who could turn any light in her home on/off from her bed -- and > the system was installed in 1950! But, in the living room, she > could only turn on the living room light! :< ) > > Until you have a framework in place, you can't begin to come up > with the myriad different "things" it can do for you! > You don't need the whole enchilada from the start. For example, if you only had up-to-the-minute TOU pricing info, a decent meter feedback in realtime, and a friendly TOU tariff, that gets it started. If the utility won't play, start with outdoor lighting, sprinklers, pool pumps. > (Instead of just streaming live video from the front doorway to > a TV monitor, why not recognize the face: "Bob is at the front > door. Do you want him to know you are home? Or, should I > just tell him no one is here and he can leave a video message > for you?" Or, maybe even let him *in* to pick up something > that you have left for him -- but if he shows up at any > other time, he's treated like a generic visitor) > Most people (like us) wouldn't care. We just go and look. If a sales dude we tell him "not interested", else it's "Hey, want to have a beer?". We are also not screening our phone calls. >>> Here, solar has taken a good foothold. In addition to all the >>> "solar pool heaters" (very old technology), I'm sure there are >>> at least 5000 sq ft of PV's within a block of our house. >>> (and those are all residential installs). >> >> Not sure where you live. Last time I flew to San Diego (few weeks ago) I >> scanned the neighborhoods from above. I was very surprised how little >> there was in solar installations. There were whole blocks where nobody >> had solar. > > So. AZ. A modest, middle-class neighborhood. Nothing excessive. > I am really surprised at how much solar I see! It seems like it > would be too soon to iron out the bugs. > Maybe you politicos were smarter and there is a good feed-in deal? > (One of the neighbors has a large, *planar* array -- i.e., not > "staggered" like sawteeth. Of course, the north edge is the > "high side". Probably at least a 10 ft rise. Which means > he's got a 20ft wide, many hundred square foot *sail* ready > to catch the microbursts that blow in from the NORTH! :-/ > It will be interesting to see if the array survives. *And*, > if it peels the roof off his house in the process!!) > Out here it would be almost guaranteed to peel off. >>> We entertained solar *water* heater but at $5K+ it was a joke! >>> Ditto with on-demand. >>> >>> "And, when the controller board craps out, the *plumber* is >>> going to repair it? Oh, it's going to be a $100 service call >>> and a board swap. So, several hundred dollars -- instead of >>> just purchasing a new *gas/electric* heater every 15 years??" >> >> Yup. If the electronics goes bad they'll likely fleece you unless you >> can find out with a sharp eye that it's a particular electrolytic that >> went bad. Or in my recent case an inadequately cooled linear regulator >> went phut. > > Exactly. It's like having an auto mechanic servicing your > refrigerator. WTF?? > They do not service electronics, they usually keep replacing until something sticks. On your nickel. >>> E.g., I have a small PV panel that I use to keep a small bank >>> of car batteries topped off in the garage. They run a pump >>> that I use to harvest rainwater (silly to pay for electricity >>> to conserve water!). And, I have a 1500VA inverter nearby so >>> I have a decent source of power (lighting, etc.) in the event of >>> a prolonged outage (without having to buy more expensive >>> batteries suitable for use indoors!) >> >> I thought about that. Harborfreight's 45W panel was down to $150 last >> time I looked. Still a bit high. > > I salvaged a bunch of tiny panels. Note that I have several days > of sunlight to recharge the battery between rain storms (which is > when I would nominally need the pump). The inverter is just gravy > for those times when it *won't* be raining (i.e., 90% of the year!) > Where do you get salvaged panels? Never seen any here. > (also handy when a car needs a "jump". Since we can expect > batteries to die pretty regularly, here, you have to *plan* > on it! At least they don't die and leave us trapped in the > *snow*! :> ) > Yes, panels are very handy if you can take one along for the ride. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-21 21:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <p8dpu818nuccouv1hckcidj502ki300pij@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #12586 |
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:47:35 -0700, Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >In my particular case (1-off), I need to fabricate two >"3x12" panels: > >XXXXXXXXXXXX >XXXXXXXXXXXX >XXXXXXXXXXXX There are various manufacturers that make unpopulated rack panels punched for Keystone RJ-45 jacks. For example: <http://www.ebay.com/itm/350464498753> <http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/260652062669> I couldn't find one in 3x12 but there may be other configurations that are suitable. Also, search for "blank rack panels". They're not really "blank" but that's what seems to produce the most hits for unpopulated panels. <www.cablestogo.com/product/03857?gclid=COLnsq-jwrgCFUFyQgod4y4AxQ> <http://www.cablewholesale.com/products/network-phone/patch-panel/product-68pb-02048.php> -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 00:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <b3hpu8ht2p68mtp2uk29o17augtdmcnv75@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #12586 |
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:47:35 -0700, Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >Hi, > >I need to fabricate a "patch panel" for a network >distribution point. Most COTS panels are fabricated >in multiples of 12 or 24. > >E.g., 1x12, 1x24 (as 12+12), 4x24, etc. > >Graphically, something like: > >1x12 XXXXXXXXXXXX > >1x24 XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX > >4x24 XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX > XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX > >Each 'X' being an 8P8C RJ45S connector. > >Typically, these "connector assemblies" are fastened >to the rear of an aluminum plate while the connectors >themselves protrude through holes in that plate >(actually, since the connectors typically abut each other, >the holes are really long *slots*) > >[Sorry if all this is obvious -- if you've seen one such >panel, you'd understand what I mean] > >In my particular case (1-off), I need to fabricate two >"3x12" panels: > >XXXXXXXXXXXX >XXXXXXXXXXXX >XXXXXXXXXXXX > >My problem is cutting these long slots in some material >(e.g., aluminum) in a manner that doesn't look amateurish. >[I suspect these slots are punched in commercial offerings >so they are nice and square, etc.] > >You *know* aluminum with a file is going to look like >"aluminum with a file" :< I just can't imagine keeping >nice hard, straight edges going that route! > >So, I'm exploring other fabrication options. E.g., perhaps >replace the aluminum with lexan? (though I'm not sure that >will be any easier to machine -- "hot knife"?) > >[I have a friend with several wire EDM's but can't bring myself >to ask for that big of a favor! :-/ ] > >Currently, I figure the easiest solution is to find a couple of >4x24 panels and cut them each in "half" (more like 55/45%] >discarding the undersized "halves". > >Is there some other trick I can explore? Anything *strong* that >can be "molded"/poured? (the panels have to support a fair bit >of force as things are plugged/unplugged "carelessly") You're looking for a "panel punch". A quick Google didn't find me a good RJ-45 one, although there are a ton of rectangular sizes available, presumably one ought to fit an RJ-45. I've personally only used some DB style ones. Details vary, but usually you drill some holes, fit the bolts that connect the front and back dies together, tighten things up, and then crank the punch screw until you've made a hole. I own one of these: http://www.greenlee.com/products/PUNCH-UNIT%2540dCONNECTOR-15-PIN-(231).html?product_id=18744
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 01:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ksir47$6u5$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12627 |
Hi Robert, On 7/21/2013 10:39 PM, Robert Wessel wrote: > You're looking for a "panel punch". A quick Google didn't find me a > good RJ-45 one, although there are a ton of rectangular sizes > available, presumably one ought to fit an RJ-45. You're suggesting "nibbling" away the long slot "one connector-width at a time"? Then, coming along afterwards with a file to trim the spots where they overlapped? > I've personally only used some DB style ones. Details vary, but > usually you drill some holes, fit the bolts that connect the front and > back dies together, tighten things up, and then crank the punch screw > until you've made a hole. I own one of these: > > http://www.greenlee.com/products/PUNCH-UNIT%2540dCONNECTOR-15-PIN-(231).html?product_id=18744 Greenlee makes great punches! Years ago I had access to a large set of their punches along with the "hydraulic" actuator (so you don't have to crank down on the bolt to drive the punch through the material). I recall using them to punch 2.5" dia holes in a panel for some analog panel meters in a power supply I was designing. Talk about "labor saving"... :> I started *looking* for extra uses for the punches: power inlets, fuse holders, etc. Things that *could* have been done with oversize drill bits but much more fun to do with the punch set! --don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 19:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <jhgru8pn0uu5jp2coon23j15moo0i5nvuj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #12631 |
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:39:32 -0700, Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >Hi Robert, > >On 7/21/2013 10:39 PM, Robert Wessel wrote: >> You're looking for a "panel punch". A quick Google didn't find me a >> good RJ-45 one, although there are a ton of rectangular sizes >> available, presumably one ought to fit an RJ-45. > >You're suggesting "nibbling" away the long slot "one connector-width at >a time"? Then, coming along afterwards with a file to trim the spots >where they overlapped? No just punching the holes you need. I was under the impression you wanted to put something like this: http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/TE-Connectivity-AMP/1368116-1/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMvQhAhQbXdbBl%252b0s4hhfArKQ2wTPFBV6Bk%3d or a collection of single ports through a panel. For a 2x6 block of RJ-45, like the one above, you'd need an (approximately) 26x87mm rectangular punch. One that size didn't leap out at me on Greenlee's site, but I did see one that looked sized for a 4x6 block of RJ-45s. Another alternative is to find someone who does waterjet cutting in your area, and send them the appropriate CAD file.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 20:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ksks7b$m7e$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12644 |
Hi Robert, On 7/22/2013 5:09 PM, Robert Wessel wrote: [attributions elided] >>> You're looking for a "panel punch". A quick Google didn't find me a >>> good RJ-45 one, although there are a ton of rectangular sizes >>> available, presumably one ought to fit an RJ-45. >> >> You're suggesting "nibbling" away the long slot "one connector-width at >> a time"? Then, coming along afterwards with a file to trim the spots >> where they overlapped? > > No just punching the holes you need. I was under the impression you > wanted to put something like this: > > http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/TE-Connectivity-AMP/1368116-1/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMvQhAhQbXdbBl%252b0s4hhfArKQ2wTPFBV6Bk%3d > > or a collection of single ports through a panel. Yes. 6 sets of 12 contiguous, individual ports. I.e., each "hole" is 0.625 x 7.5 inches. I don't think they make punches with such extreme aspect ratios. They'd either have to be very beefy *or* intended for use on really thin/soft material. (or, have many "bolts" along their length that must be tightened simultaneously) > For a 2x6 block of RJ-45, like the one above, you'd need an > (approximately) 26x87mm rectangular punch. One that size didn't leap > out at me on Greenlee's site, but I did see one that looked sized for > a 4x6 block of RJ-45s. > > Another alternative is to find someone who does waterjet cutting in > your area, and send them the appropriate CAD file. I'm going to play with some THICK lexan and maybe a 3mm sheet of aluminum (I probably have a spare "blank" in the garage). But, I'm *not* going to worry about making things nice and "square". Instead, count on an overlay to hide the blemishes (and give the thing a custom look) --don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-23 14:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ksm2m5$50m$2@gonzo.reversiblemaps.ath.cx> |
| In reply to | #12652 |
On 2013-07-23, Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >> >> No just punching the holes you need. I was under the impression you >> wanted to put something like this: >> >> http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/TE-Connectivity-AMP/1368116-1/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMvQhAhQbXdbBl%252b0s4hhfArKQ2wTPFBV6Bk%3d >> >> or a collection of single ports through a panel. > > Yes. 6 sets of 12 contiguous, individual ports. I.e., each > "hole" is 0.625 x 7.5 inches. I don't think they make punches > with such extreme aspect ratios. They'd either have to be > very beefy *or* intended for use on really thin/soft material. > (or, have many "bolts" along their length that must be tightened > simultaneously) perhaps just a doubly-inclined (V shaped) cutter backed by a truss -- ⚂⚃ 100% natural --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 18:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <jMd*9S1Eu@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #12586 |
In comp.arch.embedded Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: > So, I'm exploring other fabrication options. E.g., perhaps > replace the aluminum with lexan? (though I'm not sure that > will be any easier to machine -- "hot knife"?) If plastic would do, try laser cut acrylic (=Perspex, is that the same as lexan?) Then use clip-in patch sockets. The main difficulty would be the robustness of the plastic, plus finding sockets designed for a thick (4mm?) panel rather than 1mm steel. Tooling charges for a laser cutter should be minimal as there's almost no setup, just draw something in a vector graphics package and that should suffice. Ask your laser cutting shop what's their preferred program. Theo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 13:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <grrqu8tua5mbmur4nbpr0fcsq501k764va@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #12635 |
On 22 Jul 2013 18:33:41 +0100 (BST), Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: >In comp.arch.embedded Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >> So, I'm exploring other fabrication options. E.g., perhaps >> replace the aluminum with lexan? (though I'm not sure that >> will be any easier to machine -- "hot knife"?) > >If plastic would do, try laser cut acrylic (=Perspex, is that the same as >lexan?) Then use clip-in patch sockets. The main difficulty would be the >robustness of the plastic, plus finding sockets designed for a thick (4mm?) >panel rather than 1mm steel. > >Tooling charges for a laser cutter should be minimal as there's almost no >setup, just draw something in a vector graphics package and that should >suffice. Ask your laser cutting shop what's their preferred program. > >Theo For 2-D, almost everyone can work with a DXF file.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-22 19:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ksko3u$d8o$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12635 |
Hi Theo, On 7/22/2013 10:33 AM, Theo Markettos wrote: > In comp.arch.embedded Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >> So, I'm exploring other fabrication options. E.g., perhaps >> replace the aluminum with lexan? (though I'm not sure that >> will be any easier to machine -- "hot knife"?) > > If plastic would do, try laser cut acrylic (=Perspex, is that the same as > lexan?) Then use clip-in patch sockets. The main difficulty would be the > robustness of the plastic, plus finding sockets designed for a thick (4mm?) > panel rather than 1mm steel. If you are "unconstrained" in the layout, then you could opt for one that doesn't put as much stress on the panel material. E.g., locate the "slots" *more* than an inch apart; add stiffeners to the rear of the panel, etc. Part of the current problem is trying to take advantage of commodity equipment (e.g., existing patch panels) to reduce the cost and fabrication time. For example, damn near anyone should be able to pick up a 24 or 96 port patch panel from "someone" they know, locally, who is tossing one out (upgrading to CAT6/Gb). If you have to fabricate the entire panel from scratch, then it gets to be a project in and of itself. And, adds a lot to the cost. E.g., I suspect buying the 72 connectors "individually" for *my* panel would set me back at least $100 (e.g., $1.25 each?). Whereas you can get the assembled panel for free (or dirt cheap on eBay, etc.) > Tooling charges for a laser cutter should be minimal as there's almost no > setup, just draw something in a vector graphics package and that should > suffice. Ask your laser cutting shop what's their preferred program. What sort of money do they typically want -- if they are just cutting a handfull of "long slots"? (e.g., imagine drilling all the mounting holes yourself) I'd like to be able to describe different approaches so folks can pick whichever fits their patience/purse/persistence. --don
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-23 10:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kslkqm$ni5$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #12647 |
On a sunny day (Mon, 22 Jul 2013 19:00:30 -0700) it happened Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote in <ksko3u$d8o$1@speranza.aioe.org>: >Hi Theo, > >On 7/22/2013 10:33 AM, Theo Markettos wrote: >> In comp.arch.embedded Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: >>> So, I'm exploring other fabrication options. E.g., perhaps >>> replace the aluminum with lexan? (though I'm not sure that >>> will be any easier to machine -- "hot knife"?) >> >> If plastic would do, try laser cut acrylic (=Perspex, is that the same as >> lexan?) Then use clip-in patch sockets. The main difficulty would be the >> robustness of the plastic, plus finding sockets designed for a thick (4mm?) >> panel rather than 1mm steel. > >If you are "unconstrained" in the layout, then you could opt for >one that doesn't put as much stress on the panel material. E.g., >locate the "slots" *more* than an inch apart; add stiffeners to >the rear of the panel, etc. > >Part of the current problem is trying to take advantage of >commodity equipment (e.g., existing patch panels) to reduce the >cost and fabrication time. For example, damn near anyone >should be able to pick up a 24 or 96 port patch panel from >"someone" they know, locally, who is tossing one out (upgrading >to CAT6/Gb). > >If you have to fabricate the entire panel from scratch, then it >gets to be a project in and of itself. And, adds a lot to the >cost. E.g., I suspect buying the 72 connectors "individually" >for *my* panel would set me back at least $100 (e.g., $1.25 each?). >Whereas you can get the assembled panel for free (or dirt cheap on >eBay, etc.) > >> Tooling charges for a laser cutter should be minimal as there's almost no >> setup, just draw something in a vector graphics package and that should >> suffice. Ask your laser cutting shop what's their preferred program. > >What sort of money do they typically want -- if they are just >cutting a handfull of "long slots"? (e.g., imagine drilling >all the mounting holes yourself) I'd like to be able to describe >different approaches so folks can pick whichever fits their >patience/purse/persistence. From that POV, why not use relais, and some [i]pad or other monitor as display, with touch screen squares? And then you can have configuraton pre-sets too, flashing lights, and text all for free, just some coding. May even work out cheaper in the end, and provides remote control from anywhere in the world. And hides the ele tron nix. >--don > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-23 11:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lMd*RE5Eu@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #12647 |
In comp.arch.embedded Don Y <this@isnotme.com> wrote: > What sort of money do they typically want -- if they are just > cutting a handfull of "long slots"? (e.g., imagine drilling > all the mounting holes yourself) I'd like to be able to describe > different approaches so folks can pick whichever fits their > patience/purse/persistence. I don't know as we bought our own laser cutter - at GBP12K it wasn't that expensive for a tool you can use pretty much 24/7 with no consumables (apart from a 400GBP cutting bed every few months). So I'd guess the main cost of a cutting shop would be the time of the operator, with the laser cutter folded into the overheads of running the shop (similar to a car mechanic's tools). Let's say you were cutting a series of RJ45 holes into 4mm acrylic. My rough guess would be 5s per hole, 48 holes that's about 5 mins. Cut rate, guess, 2 inch per second? Loading up the files etc etc maybe another 5 mins. So what's 10 mins of pro car mechanic time, that sort of ballpark? For the plastic... we get it at about GBP20-30 per 1m x 600mm sheet, so work out what area you need... If there's a local 'Makespace', 'Hackspace' etc nearby you can get rather more hands on with the laser cutter and experiment yourself. Theo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-23 13:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lMd*m75Eu@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #12655 |
In comp.arch.embedded Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: > If there's a local 'Makespace', 'Hackspace' etc nearby you can get rather > more hands on with the laser cutter and experiment yourself. Forgot to mention, when laser cutting it's straightforward to engrave legends too. If it's clear plastic, do it from the backside (and reverse the text), if opaque you'll have to do it from the front. You can get special contrasty plastic (white layer on top of black layer, so the cut shows the black through) but often just engraving normal plastic will suffice. For example, this is backside marked onto clear 4mm acrylic: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/comparch/opensource/de4tablet/ Theo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | 0bama <0B@nocontrast.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-23 13:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kslv74$f7c$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #12657 |
On a sunny day (23 Jul 2013 13:46:43 +0100 (BST)) it happened Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in <lMd*m75Eu@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>: >In comp.arch.embedded Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: >> If there's a local 'Makespace', 'Hackspace' etc nearby you can get rather >> more hands on with the laser cutter and experiment yourself. > >Forgot to mention, when laser cutting it's straightforward to engrave >legends too. If it's clear plastic, do it from the backside (and reverse >the text), if opaque you'll have to do it from the front. You can get >special contrasty plastic (white layer on top of black layer, so the cut >shows the black through) but often just engraving normal plastic will >suffice. > >For example, this is backside marked onto clear 4mm acrylic: >http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/comparch/opensource/de4tablet/ How you get new text after the boating? You make moire penels in advaced? >Theo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-07-23 22:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <kMd*zZ7Eu@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #12659 |
In comp.arch.embedded 0bama <0B@nocontrast.org> wrote: > On a sunny day (23 Jul 2013 13:46:43 +0100 (BST)) it happened Theo Markettos > <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in > <lMd*m75Eu@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>: > >For example, this is backside marked onto clear 4mm acrylic: > >http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/comparch/opensource/de4tablet/ > > How you get new text after the boating? > You make moire penels in advaced? I'm sorry, I don't quite understand? Theo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded
csiph-web