Re: Re: Request Input on new Project

[Frank Mc Alinden <fmcalind@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Mark


>2: A family of PIC-based products that talk native xAP for
>temperature, humidity, noise, PIR that use RS485. I'm trying to get
>UK pricing for these sorted out at the moment. I also owe Mark a
>review on the pre-production models (mea culpa.)

Have these pic based devices been mentioned on the list ?? Some pics please
;-))......Does the pir talk native xAP ????

Frank




----- Original Message -----
From: mark_harrison_uk2
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 10:38 PM
Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Request Input on new Project


Frank,

Ian's relay board and Kevin's C-Bus interface are both good examples.

In addition, I can think of three others

1: The Rabbit-based ethernet controller I reviewed here:

http://www.automatedhome.co.uk/article.php3?
story_id=1204&slashSess=7436f19e06e0c1c297b472b7ab624304

Worth pointing out that, in addition to the use I put it to, this
will also act as an ethernet - serial xAP bridge.

2: A family of PIC-based products that talk native xAP for
temperature, humidity, noise, PIR that use RS485. I'm trying to get
UK pricing for these sorted out at the moment. I also owe Mark a
review on the pre-production models (mea culpa.)


3: There's also another hardware board that has been used for
embedded control in print shops. It's specialised, industrial, and if
I remember correctly not available as a separate item - only as part
of a whole system. No idea what this runs on, but it does run native
xAP.

Regards,

Mark

--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "armagh_elect" <fmcalind@b...>
wrote:
> Hi Mark
>         I meant xAP systems that didnt have a computer as part of
> the installation ...As you know i have dabbled in both protocols a
> little and it seems to me they really need a computer as part of
the
> system...My thoughts are that for the small micro both are too
> heavy ..although Patrick just mentioned there are pic based devices
> out there....The only hardware that im aware of thats been
developed
> is Ians Relay Controller and Kevins C_Bus interface...are there any
> other hardware devices talking native xAP..???...
>
> Frank
>
>
> --- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "mark_harrison_uk2" <mph@a...>
wrote:
> > Frank,
> >
> > Do you mean "complete installations" or
"devices".
> >
> > Plenty of devices out there, some available commercially. As for
> > complete installations, as far as I'm aware, every xAP
> installation
> > in the field has a PC _somewhere_, simply because people want to
> be
> > able to do things like chuck data onto web pages and into
> databases.
> >
> > The most complex installation I know of has a ratio of about 30-
40
> > embedded devices per PC.
> >
> > Certainly, my home installation is nothing like that complex,
only
> 1
> > embedded device in regular use (the Rabbit-based controller for
my
> hi-
> > fi, reviewed on automatedhome)... but several wireless PCs dotted
> > around the house that do web control.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > --- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, Frank Mc Alinden <fmcalind@b...>
> wrote:
> > > Hi Mark
> > >             Are there xAP installations out there that are
not
> > using pc,s??
> > >
> > > Frank
> > >   ----- Original Message -----
> > >   From: mark_harrison_uk2
> > >   To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > >   Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 9:22 PM
> > >   Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Request Input on new Project
> > >
> > >
> > >   Gavin,
> > >
> > >   In addition to xPL you should consider xAP 1.2
> > >   (www.xapautomation.org).
> > >
> > >   xPL and xAP are both forks from xAP 1.1 which have both
moved
> a
> > long
> > >   way. Indeed the two founders of xPL worked on the
> Specification
> > of
> > >   xAP 1.2 before leaving because they had a different
vision.
> > >
> > >   There are a number of technical differences between them.
In
> my
> > view
> > >   (and others in both worlds will have different opinions),
then
> > key
> > >   difference is that of the central controller model.
> > >
> > >   xPL is bound up heavily with xPLHal as the centrepiece.
xPLHal
> is
> > 1:
> > >   Good, and 2: Free. I am not aware of any xPL
implementations
> that
> > >   don't use it.
> > >
> > >   xAP envisages a far more distributed world where a central
> > controller
> > >   is not inherently required by the architecture at
run-time,
> since
> > end-
> > >   point components can have control logic pushed to them at
> install-
> > >   time. In practice, most xAP (90%?) installations in the
field
> > have
> > >   ended up with a central controller, and no small number of
> them
> > use
> > >   xPLHal (which has good xAP 1.2 support.)
> > >
> > >   Scalability is good: the largest xAP installation in the
field
> > has
> > >   about 120 "devices", a mix of "virtual
devices" such as
> > connectors
> > >   for computer-based stuff, and hardware devices such as
> > temperature
> > >   sensors, PIRs, relay controllers etc. I don't know what
the
> > biggest
> > >   xPL implementation installed is, but I would be very
surprised
> if
> > it
> > >   didn't scale up to the needs of 99.9% of homes. Some of
the
> more
> > >   complex xAP installations are commercial not domestic.
> > >
> > >   Regards,
> > >
> > >   Mark
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >   --- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, Gavin Kistner <gavin@r...>
> wrote:
> > >   > SUMMARY
> > >   > I'm about 6 months away from beginning construction
on my
> own
> > >   house,
> > >   > and I have extensive automation visions. I need lots
of
> solid
> > urls
> > >   and
> > >   > recommendations from you experienced folks for my
research,
> and
> > >   would
> > >   > like your feedback on an open source project I'm
> contemplating
> > >   > beginning for this effort.
> > >   >
> > >   > Despite the length of this post, I'm *not* asking you
to
> design
> > or
> > >   > build my system for me. I'm looking for feedback.
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   > HEY THERE
> > >   > So, first, if cross-posting to all three of these
lists is
a
> > bad
> > >   idea,
> > >   > please wonk me with a stick of Rightness and tell me
which
> is
> > the
> > >   > correct group to continue this discussion on.
> > >   >
> > >   > Second: Hey there! I'm excited to join the world of
home
> > automaters
> > >   as
> > >   > more than a spectator, though the circumstances daunt
me. :)
> > >   >
> > >   > You may look at the below and say "Uhm, this
seems like an
> > insane
> > >   > amount of work, when solution _____ would work just
as
well.
> I
> > >   wonder
> > >   > why he's decided not to do that." The answer to
those sorts
> of
> > >   > questions is probably "Because I'm an impatient
idiot who
> > hasn't
> > >   done
> > >   > his homework and research properly."
> > >   >
> > >   > Please feel free to yell at me and tell me a far
easier way
> to
> > >   achieve
> > >   > my goals, though please read as much of the following
as
you
> > can
> > >   before
> > >   > doing so, because if you propose solution _____ which
> actually
> > only
> > >   > covers 80% of my goals, in my naivete I probably
won't
> realize
> > that
> > >   > it's not the right solution until far later, and then
I'll
> be
> > >   cranky :)
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   > ROUGH GOALS FOR MY PARTICULAR HOUSE
> > >   > I'm a geek, but despite that my goal is to make the
> automation
> > as
> > >   > transparent as possible. No ugly wall warts, almost
> > no 'attractive'
> > >   > master control wallplates, no text-to-speech
computers
> > announcing
> > >   > trivial things. The interior should look like a non-
> automated
> > >   house,
> > >   > and work like a non-automated house, with the
exception of
> how
> > it
> > >   > reacts to its use, and the exception of a few
wall-mounted
> > control
> > >   > touchscreens.
> > >   >
> > >   > Here's roughly what I'm aiming for:
> > >   >
> > >   > * Every (almost) light switch in the house should be
able
to
> be
> > >   > computer controlled, with about 2/3 of them dimmable.
(Rough
> > count
> > >   is
> > >   > 23 dimmable light 'zones', and 10 non-dimmable.) This
> includes
> > 4-6
> > >   > table/floor lamps.
> > >   >
> > >   > * 7 zones for music (speaker sets). Any zone should
be able
> to
> > >   listen
> > >   > to any audio source, in an n-to-n matrix.
> > >   >
> > >   > * 6 audio sources.
> > >   >
> > >   > * 1 big TV, and the ability (hopefully) to route
video
> signals
> > to
> > >   the
> > >   > wall LCDs and/or any computer in the house.
> > >   >
> > >   > * 5-6 video sources (3-4 of which are security
cameras)
> > >   >
> > >   > * 3 watering zones
> > >   >
> > >   > * Light, Temperature, and Humidity sensors in 5-6
locations,
> > and a
> > >   full
> > >   > weather station outside also hooked in.
> > >   >
> > >   > * 7 radiant floor heating zones, controllable by the
system.
> > >   >
> > >   > * A few motorized blinds.
> > >   >
> > >   > * All doors and operable windows with open/closed
sensors.
> > >   >
> > >   > * All but one exterior door with computer controlled
> deadbolt,
> > >   > auto-opening using something like iButton.
> > >   >
> > >   > * An RF sensor for buttons activated from the car.
> > >   >
> > >   > * My own custom interface, designed by me.
> > >   >
> > >   > * The ability to set up complex triggers/macros
*after*
> > >   installation,
> > >   > like: "If the average temperature in the
livingroom is
above
> > ___
> > >   and
> > >   > the heating is on, turn it off. If the heat is
already off,
> and
> > the
> > >   > blinds are open, and the light level in the room is
above
> ____,
> > >   close
> > >   > the blinds."
> > >   >
> > >   > * The ability to view graphs of historical sensor
data
> ("show
> > me
> > >   the
> > >   > average temperature in the room over the last
day").
> > >   >
> > >   > * I want to buy quality, premade components and hook
them
> up. I
> > do
> > >   > *not* want to solder. (Not only have I never been
very good
> at
> > it,
> > >   but
> > >   > primarily I want a solution that my friends can use
just by
> > >   spending
> > >   > money themselves.)
> > >   >
> > >   > * If I can find them, I was really hoping to use
> touchscreen,
> > >   wireless,
> > >   > LCD thin network clients to both control the house
and also
> use
> > >   other
> > >   > 'intranet' applications, and browse the web.
Something in
> the
> > 14-
> > >   17"
> > >   > range.
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   > WHY CAN'T I USE EXISTING SOLUTIONS?
> > >   > I dunno, maybe I can. But so far, every system I've
looked
> > suffers
> > >   from
> > >   > one or more of the following problems:
> > >   >
> > >   > * Covers a portion of the system, but not all of it.
> (Lighting
> > and
> > >   AV,
> > >   > but not temperature or watering.)
> > >   >
> > >   > * Have expensive components which try and do too much
work
> > >   themselves.
> > >   > (I already have a DVD player with 2 video outputs, a
> receiver
> > with
> > >   6
> > >   > video inputs and 2 outputs, and a TV with 3 video
inputs
and
> 2
> > coax
> > >   > tuners. Every piece is trying to do the job of every
other
> > piece. I
> > >   > don't want a lightswitch that stores complex lighting
> schemes
> > when
> > >   > that's what the computer will be doing.)
> > >   >
> > >   > * Are proprietary, usually in a silly way. I can't
easily
> > extend
> > >   the
> > >   > system myself later, and probably can't program it
myself.
> > >   >
> > >   > * Have horrific 1980-looking touchpad interfaces,
which are
> > usually
> > >   > designed around the hardware's features rather than
the
> user's
> > >   needs.
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   > THE SOFTWARE SOLUTION - WHAT I'M (gasp) PLANNING
> > >   > So, what I'm thinking really needs to happen is to
abstract
> the
> > >   various
> > >   > levels from each other:
> > >   >
> > >   > Interface <-- abstraction layer --> Control
Software <--
> > >   abstraction
> > >   > layer --> Hardware
> > >   >
> > >   > The project I'm planning (and dreading) is to write
(open
> > source)
> > >   the
> > >   > middle component in such a way that people can
develop
their
> > own
> > >   > interface programs which communicate with it.
> > >   >
> > >   > More importantly, each type of hardware device (from
> different
> > >   > manufacturers and using different technologies) will
have
> its
> > own
> > >   > 'plugin'/DLL written for it, which abstracts the
> implementation
> > >   from
> > >   > the control interface.
> > >   >
> > >   > For a far better visual representation, see:
> > >   > http://phrogz.net/tmp/HouseMouse_Block.png
> > >   >
> > >   > CoolTechnologyCompany will release a new bluetooth
> temperature
> > >   sensor.
> > >   > I (or you) will write the plugin for it that
describes the
> > >   properties
> > >   > and methods it supports, and internally knows how to
produce
> > the
> > >   values
> > >   > and perform the methods. I drop the plugin into my
own
> > components
> > >   > directory, tell the Master Program to rescan
components and
> > >   (without
> > >   > restarting the program and crashing the house)
suddenly the
> > admin
> > >   side
> > >   > of the Master Program knows how to control that
device.
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   > Note that when I mention this project a lot of geeks
> > >   say "Zeroconf!",
> > >   > "Embedded Linux!", thinking that I'm
suggesting that the
> > hardware
> > >   > device (the lightswitch) itself is supposed to expose
its
> > >   > functionality. While this would be grand, this isn't
the
> case
> > with
> > >   99%
> > >   > of the existing hardware out there, and that's what I
want
> to
> > use.
> > >   I
> > >   > want a piece of software--the plugin--to provide the
> > abstraction.
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   >
> > >   > HELP ME!
> > >   > Am I insane? Does this middle Master Program already
exist?
> Can
> > I
> > >   > accomplish all my goals above without this level of
> abstraction?
> > >   >
> > >   > If I had a solution like this readily available,
would you
> want
> > it?
> > >   > Does your answer depend on what language it was
written in,
> or
> > on
> > >   the
> > >   > hardware platform (Windows vs. MacOS vs. Linux vs.
BSD)
that
> it
> > ran
> > >   on?
> > >   >
> > >   > If I wrote this in Java as an open-source project,
would
you
> be
> > >   willing
> > >   > and able to contribute?
> > >   >
> > >   > I know so little about the amazing array of hardware
choices
> > >   available.
> > >   > (X10 switches; X10 in-wiring control; Lutron RadioRA;
> Clipsal
> > >   C_Bus;
> > >   > etc.). My software wouldn't care which system I ended
up
> using,
> > but
> > >   the
> > >   > electrician wiring the house needs to know. How can I
figure
> > out
> > >   what's
> > >   > good and what isn't, and (more importantly) what the
full
> > spectrum
> > >   of
> > >   > offerings is?
> > >   >
> > >   > In your experience, do professional automation
'experts'
> know
> > what
> > >   > they're talking about, or do they only know the
solution or
> two
> > >   that
> > >   > they are a reseller for? Should I hire such a
consultant to
> > work
> > >   out
> > >   > the system, or are they going to just say
"You're dreaming;
> > here,
> > >   just
> > >   > buy this."
> > >   >
> > >   > Am I dreaming? Is this project too ambitious to even
think
> of
> > >   > attempting with ~1 year to go until the house should
be
> close
> > to
> > >   done?
> > >   >
> > >   > --
> > >   > (-, /\ \/ / /\/
> > >
> > >
> > >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > >               ADVERTISEMENT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >   UKHA 2004: 15th and 16th May 2004
> > >
> > >   http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
> > >   Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > >   Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
> > >   Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
> > >   List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
> > >
> > >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
> > Service.
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]