insteon lighting system
- Thread starter rodneee
- Start date
- Status
gar
Senior Member
- Location
- Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Occupation
- EE
100330-0942 EST
I took a quick look at their website. I am not impressed, badly designed. Lettering is too small to read on my screen. I did not find where they discussed the philosophy of their system. Indirectly it appears to be a carrier current system, such as X10. These I do not like if you want a rock solid reliable system.
Direct hard wiring is one of the most reliable means of communication for short ranges.
One thing to consider in any system is simplicity.
.
I took a quick look at their website. I am not impressed, badly designed. Lettering is too small to read on my screen. I did not find where they discussed the philosophy of their system. Indirectly it appears to be a carrier current system, such as X10. These I do not like if you want a rock solid reliable system.
Direct hard wiring is one of the most reliable means of communication for short ranges.
One thing to consider in any system is simplicity.
.
ELA
Senior Member
- Occupation
- Electrical Test Engineer
A notch above X-10
A notch above X-10
I have used a lot of X-10 stuff and that system can be very unreliable.
X-10 uses only power line carrier to communicate.
Insteon has explanations of operations available at their website.
Although You may need to increase the font size
Try this Gar :
http://www.insteon.net/about-whitepapers.html
You can also find information about Insteon at "Smarthome.com".
Although you cannot beat direct wiring for reliability the Insteon system is a pretty reliable system in that it is a "mesh network" that uses both power line carrier and RF.
I have a few Insteon devices installed and have been happy with their operation and will soon upgrade all my X-10 to Insteon.
They are not the best design out there and can suffer from issues like a loss of memory when the power glitches.
Note that you need to have a neutral available at all switch locations.
If you do a large install I would recommend a "controller" be used that has the ability to back up the programming of each device so that the system can be easily restored if required.
A notch above X-10
I have used a lot of X-10 stuff and that system can be very unreliable.
X-10 uses only power line carrier to communicate.
Insteon has explanations of operations available at their website.
Although You may need to increase the font size
Try this Gar :
http://www.insteon.net/about-whitepapers.html
You can also find information about Insteon at "Smarthome.com".
Although you cannot beat direct wiring for reliability the Insteon system is a pretty reliable system in that it is a "mesh network" that uses both power line carrier and RF.
I have a few Insteon devices installed and have been happy with their operation and will soon upgrade all my X-10 to Insteon.
They are not the best design out there and can suffer from issues like a loss of memory when the power glitches.
Note that you need to have a neutral available at all switch locations.
If you do a large install I would recommend a "controller" be used that has the ability to back up the programming of each device so that the system can be easily restored if required.
gar
Senior Member
- Location
- Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Occupation
- EE
100330-1623 EST
ELA:
Your comments are certainly useful and I took a quick look at the white paper on communication.
Complexity and reliability are two very important considerations. I have GE RR relays for all of my switched circuits. Relatively speaking these have been quite reliable. I have the units that plugged into a pair of buss bars. This design has resulted in the failure of maybe 6 out of 60 or so relays in 45 years. Mechanical stress prevented the snap blade from being stable in both states on those failed units. Typically they were temperature sensitive. For switching purposes these are capable of any logic I need.
These have gone thru a few electrical disruptions and a large number of on-off cycles. These are not bothered by noise on the power system or large local radio frequency transmitters. I have to consider the reliability as having been excellent.
There are a lot of devices that are getting too complex, illogical, and confusing to use. My wife gets upset with her car because it beeps, flashes lights, provides warnings, and creates confusion. She wants a simpler system. Part of the problem is that too many display items are in Chinese (by that I mean icons that are not intuitively obvious) and require a dictionary (the car manual) to figure out what they are. What is wrong with English words like Bat (battery), etc. That is the way it was previously. Why does the gas gauge read from right to left for low to high. Clockwise should be an increase reading. Why aren't knobs designed to go from low to high with clockwise rotation. Radios worked this way since I was a kid. Usually voltmeters read from 0 to + in a clockwise direction, starting with Weston if not earlier.
I was just at the dry cleaners. They previously used your phone number as an ID, new system has changed to your last name. This is a stupid change. Phone numbers are nearly unique, not last names.
Simplicity where possible is vital. With my GE system off is always down and up is always on no matter how many points a circuit is controlled from.
In software I have written for communicating with our CNC machines one simply highlights the file to be sent, double click, type in the machine number, and carriage return. File is sent with all of the correct RS232 settings for that machine. Many commercial programs require many more operations to do the same operation. Also my program allows many programs to be sent without reinitialization for the particular machine, at either the machine or computer.
I like a lot of what is discussed in the white paper. The real question is the system rock solid for many years. Lightning, power fluctuations, transients, and other disturbances should not cause unexpected operation or require reloading of software and parameters.
.
ELA:
Your comments are certainly useful and I took a quick look at the white paper on communication.
Complexity and reliability are two very important considerations. I have GE RR relays for all of my switched circuits. Relatively speaking these have been quite reliable. I have the units that plugged into a pair of buss bars. This design has resulted in the failure of maybe 6 out of 60 or so relays in 45 years. Mechanical stress prevented the snap blade from being stable in both states on those failed units. Typically they were temperature sensitive. For switching purposes these are capable of any logic I need.
These have gone thru a few electrical disruptions and a large number of on-off cycles. These are not bothered by noise on the power system or large local radio frequency transmitters. I have to consider the reliability as having been excellent.
There are a lot of devices that are getting too complex, illogical, and confusing to use. My wife gets upset with her car because it beeps, flashes lights, provides warnings, and creates confusion. She wants a simpler system. Part of the problem is that too many display items are in Chinese (by that I mean icons that are not intuitively obvious) and require a dictionary (the car manual) to figure out what they are. What is wrong with English words like Bat (battery), etc. That is the way it was previously. Why does the gas gauge read from right to left for low to high. Clockwise should be an increase reading. Why aren't knobs designed to go from low to high with clockwise rotation. Radios worked this way since I was a kid. Usually voltmeters read from 0 to + in a clockwise direction, starting with Weston if not earlier.
I was just at the dry cleaners. They previously used your phone number as an ID, new system has changed to your last name. This is a stupid change. Phone numbers are nearly unique, not last names.
Simplicity where possible is vital. With my GE system off is always down and up is always on no matter how many points a circuit is controlled from.
In software I have written for communicating with our CNC machines one simply highlights the file to be sent, double click, type in the machine number, and carriage return. File is sent with all of the correct RS232 settings for that machine. Many commercial programs require many more operations to do the same operation. Also my program allows many programs to be sent without reinitialization for the particular machine, at either the machine or computer.
I like a lot of what is discussed in the white paper. The real question is the system rock solid for many years. Lightning, power fluctuations, transients, and other disturbances should not cause unexpected operation or require reloading of software and parameters.
.
ELA
Senior Member
- Occupation
- Electrical Test Engineer
Gar,
We are getting old aren't we
I also like things simpler and would prefer they not change unless there is a very good reason for the change.
However technology is ever changing and I like to at least make an attempt at keeping up. (but only for a few more years
I agree that power line interruptions/surges etc. should not cause a memory (stored parameter) loss. I have had a few discussions with the Smarthome people over this. Their old Switchlinc X-10 series had the problem and they claimed to have eliminated it in the Insteon product. The very first Insteon device I installed lost its program the first time I switched its breaker on/off.
They evidently have a few things to learn about protecting non-volatile memory.
The advantage of the added complexity allows for many features such as:
1) All lamps can be dimmed and the light brightness is ramped up/down at turn on/off reducing inrush.
2) Lights can be linked together in what are called "scenes" that can provide for some nice mood lighting.
3) The RF link allows for remote PIR control of lights as well as with small remote control fobs.
4) If you add a controller you can write programs and use timers to perform all sorts of more complicated controls.
I got started with X-10 a long time ago and liked the ability to have all my lights dimmed and to have IR sensors control lights and RF remote controls for lighting etc.
I became very unhappy with the poor reliability of the system. The reliability would change every time you added a new electrical device to the homes wiring system.
I do think Insteon is far ahead of X-10 and will be reliable (other than for that pesky -possible memory loss). I intend to include a controller which backs up all the programming to make up for that possibility.
These more complex lighting control systems do require some time be invested in learning about them and programming them. Then of course just when you get up to speed they will change on you
We are getting old aren't we
I also like things simpler and would prefer they not change unless there is a very good reason for the change.
However technology is ever changing and I like to at least make an attempt at keeping up. (but only for a few more years
I agree that power line interruptions/surges etc. should not cause a memory (stored parameter) loss. I have had a few discussions with the Smarthome people over this. Their old Switchlinc X-10 series had the problem and they claimed to have eliminated it in the Insteon product. The very first Insteon device I installed lost its program the first time I switched its breaker on/off.
They evidently have a few things to learn about protecting non-volatile memory.
The advantage of the added complexity allows for many features such as:
1) All lamps can be dimmed and the light brightness is ramped up/down at turn on/off reducing inrush.
2) Lights can be linked together in what are called "scenes" that can provide for some nice mood lighting.
3) The RF link allows for remote PIR control of lights as well as with small remote control fobs.
4) If you add a controller you can write programs and use timers to perform all sorts of more complicated controls.
I got started with X-10 a long time ago and liked the ability to have all my lights dimmed and to have IR sensors control lights and RF remote controls for lighting etc.
I became very unhappy with the poor reliability of the system. The reliability would change every time you added a new electrical device to the homes wiring system.
I do think Insteon is far ahead of X-10 and will be reliable (other than for that pesky -possible memory loss). I intend to include a controller which backs up all the programming to make up for that possibility.
These more complex lighting control systems do require some time be invested in learning about them and programming them. Then of course just when you get up to speed they will change on you
gar
Senior Member
- Location
- Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Occupation
- EE
100330-2106 EST
ELA:
In the fall of 71 I designed and built some LVDT gaging equipment that went into the rear axle assembly line at Buick Motor. The microprocessor did not exist at this time, but I decided to go digital. Up to the 1 V level the system was analog, and after that point all digital. The program was stored in Harris fusible link memory. The total program was about 32 lines of code. My processing of data was 16 bits wide in binary or BCD.
About a year later EPROM in a small size became available at about $200 a chip. These were I believe 2k bits, not bytes. A 256 bit fusible link memory was not inexpensive either. PDP-s were $30,000 to $50,000. Our gaging system could never have been justified with a PDP-8.
Our first systems did not have adjustable parameters. These were fixed in the ROM. It was soon necessary to have adjustable parameters for Pontiac pinion preload adjustment machines and these were kept to a minimum and I used thumbwheel switches.
By about 1974 static CMOS memory became available, and I incorporated this with battery backup, a 3 digit address thumbwheel, and a 5 digit data thumbwheel for data entry into the CMOS memory. From the very start this was designed with memory protection below 4.8 V. Never had any data loss from power up-down or storms over the intervening years. Bad batteries or a few component failures were the only causes of data loss.
There is no excuse today for parameter loss from battery backed memory with normal power variations. That includes transients. Obviously a direct hit to the memory with high voltage, meaning maybe 10 V, will cause problems.
.
ELA:
In the fall of 71 I designed and built some LVDT gaging equipment that went into the rear axle assembly line at Buick Motor. The microprocessor did not exist at this time, but I decided to go digital. Up to the 1 V level the system was analog, and after that point all digital. The program was stored in Harris fusible link memory. The total program was about 32 lines of code. My processing of data was 16 bits wide in binary or BCD.
About a year later EPROM in a small size became available at about $200 a chip. These were I believe 2k bits, not bytes. A 256 bit fusible link memory was not inexpensive either. PDP-s were $30,000 to $50,000. Our gaging system could never have been justified with a PDP-8.
Our first systems did not have adjustable parameters. These were fixed in the ROM. It was soon necessary to have adjustable parameters for Pontiac pinion preload adjustment machines and these were kept to a minimum and I used thumbwheel switches.
By about 1974 static CMOS memory became available, and I incorporated this with battery backup, a 3 digit address thumbwheel, and a 5 digit data thumbwheel for data entry into the CMOS memory. From the very start this was designed with memory protection below 4.8 V. Never had any data loss from power up-down or storms over the intervening years. Bad batteries or a few component failures were the only causes of data loss.
There is no excuse today for parameter loss from battery backed memory with normal power variations. That includes transients. Obviously a direct hit to the memory with high voltage, meaning maybe 10 V, will cause problems.
.
ELA
Senior Member
- Occupation
- Electrical Test Engineer
Gar,
As wireguru mentioned most equipment today stores code variables in EEPROM.
Over the years I have worked with lots of equipment using EEPROM and designed a few as well. Many of these pieces of equipment had variable success at protecting the memory (especially in the early days). The issue is detecting power line transitions and issueing a write protect to the EEprom during these transitions.
In some cases a piece of equipment may work for years never losing its programming. Then if the power line glitch has a great enough dv/dt the protection fails. Or another instance can be when the source impedance becomes very low (short circuit as opposed to open circuit) and then recovers abruptly.
- Status