Thanks Dan,
I can see your reasoning and had not reached
the
conclusion that your redundancy was due to any one unreliable
component.
It got me wondering if a totally automated approach is ok. There are many
approaches to HA. Hence the question.
What i want to do is remove manual control, i
want automation. I don't want a fancy interface to turn lights on, i
want
intelligent automation.
I intend to move on to lights, as you say this
can be flawed. Thats why the main area i indend to do first are the
outside flood lights (no big deal if it fails), the stair case (covered by
emergency lights). I have no intention of moving so have no requirement to
retain normal switches. I intend to remove them totally and i am using
relay
control rather than iffy X10. I may retain manual switches in say bathroom
& kitchen.
Having worked in electronics, i can say
comfort
is manufactured to a very high standard in particular the pcb which is of
very
high quality. I have had one comfort failure but even this may not have
been
in comforts control e.g failure of supplied component. I suspect this was a
very rare occurance and probably less likely than a mains fuse failure or
as
you point out lightening.
When our kitchen light failed. It was not the
fuse or the switch or the tube or the starter or the light fitting. It was
the
WIRE, twin & earth solid core copper. The least high tech component and
even had this been controlled by a room of computers, it still would have
failed!!!!!
I guess in around about way i was asking for
views on if a automated system with no redundancy is a too risky approach
or
if carefully designed would be no more prone to failure than a fuse, bulb
or
piece of wire.
Sorry if i inferred any unreliabilty of
comfort.
That is not the case.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:38
PM
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] How reliable is
comfort
Steve,
First I want to clarify my comments regarding the
doorbell and redundant systems. My philosophy of keeping each of my
HA
systems independent of each other so that if 1 system is down the others
will work, does NOT come from having unreliable equipment in my
house.
Both my HV and Comfort systems have worked flawlessly since I installed
them. Instead, it comes from the reality that eventually 1 of these
systems will likely fail and I don't want to lose all HA features when it
does. I had a lightning strike 2 years ago (Comfort was not yet
installed) that took out my HV. Since all HA devices have local
control, I was still able to operate everyhting manually until I got the HV
repaired.
Also, since I am a software developer, my systems
are in a constant state of change. So, I need to plan for the case
when I write bad software for 1 of the systems or I short 2 wires together
and blow something up (which is much more likely than 1 of these systems
failing I think).
So, my answer to your question is that from my
experience (which is admittedly only 1 system so far), Comfort is very
reliable.
Another of my design philosophies is that my
lighting has local control and does not use any special wiring that the
average electrician can not work on. This allows me to sell my house
and take my HA stuff with me, or leave the HA stuff. In either case,
the new owners can replace the X-10 wall switch with a "normal"
switch. And, they can operate the lights if the system is down.
I would not consider installing lights where there was no local
control. I am not sure that I could program into my system all the
scenerios where I might want the lights on and/or off.
Consider if you will ever just want to leave these
lights on for some reason. And, if controlled by a motion sensor,
will
it see a child walking into the room? What about pets? The list
goes on and on. Obviously this is a personal preference/situation
decision that you must make and you may not agree with my thinking, which
is
fine. I just wanted to point out a few things.
Dan
-----Original
Message-----
From: steve
[mailto:steve@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001
1:46 PM
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxxSubject: [ukha_d] How
reliable is comfort
Hi,
Following on from Phil's recent long reply
and a comment of Dan's on the comfort list refering to duplication of
manual systems and HA (Door bell's).
Up to now my HA kit has handled the heating
of my home and my flats next door. PC based and no big deal when it
crashed. I am now moving on with addition of comfort & have on order a
SEP01 and a LEM01. I have been busy constructing 4 x 4 relay boards for
mains control.
It is my intention to control lighting on a
stair case (2 flights, 3 landings) and kitchen and bathroom having no
manual control just comfort. The staircase is covered by 3 maintained
emergency lights and although only 8w we never actually use the existing
lights. So no great danger of failure here.
I have removed the ify element of X10 by
using the relays. (i have an x10 dusk/dawn light that works fine for weeks
then despite being told its command every 5 mins can look a though it has
failed. Then as if by magic next days its fine). So back to my question.
Having had one comfort failure generally how reliable is comfort
?
Steve.
For more
information: 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.
For more information: 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.
For
more information: 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.