RE: [Development] Lights, an Idea any comments

["Mick Furlong" <dorsai@xxxxxxx>]

John

what communication mechanism will you be using between the rabbit and the
pics?

Reason I ask is I know a number of us like to have things contolled by a
PC.
If the communication is compatible (ie a standard) then it might be
possible
for us to look at a version with direct PC control and no rabbit as an
option. Or even for the PC to act as a back up and 'supervisor' for the
Rabbit (I realise the Rabbit's TCPIP comms will allow this but what if it
gets fried? ).

Probably crazy but then I am:)

Mick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr John Tankard [mailto:john@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 11 June 2001 16:17
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: [ukha_d] [Development] Lights, an Idea any comments
>
>
>
> Ok, I have got the 8 channel dimmer working (No triac's just watching
the
> firing pulse on a scope) still a few bugs to sort out I am using
> code from a
> prototype which is 3 years old but it was much closer to what we want
than
> my current prototype. At the moment I am sending commands to it over a
> serial link using SNAP I am going to change this to something simpler
so
> that a terminal can run it just in case anyone does not want to use
the
> rabbit. I have not started to code the Rabbit yet.
>
> The question is this, my initial idea was a rabbit core mounted on a
> motherboard which had the PIC this was then connected to some daughter
> boards each with the drive components on for a channel. This
> would mean the
> box would live either in node 0 or in a cupboard close to the
> room(s) it was
> controlling. But because we have a high spec rabbit, I wondered
> if it might
> be a idea to split the rabbit and the PIC so that one rabbit could run
> several PIC's each of which would be doing 8 channels this would cut
the
> cost down as only one rabbit is required. It does also mean the
> software has
> to be much more complicated.
>
> If we do this then I think the PIC should also handle the local
control as
> the Rabbit would become a single point of failure for several
> dimmer packs ?
>
> Personally I still prefer one Rabbit, one PIC and 8 Dimmers, with the
PIC
> driving the triac's and the Rabbit doing the local control and the
remote
> interface, but I thought the group should decide as this other
> option would
> reduce the cost for large installations.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________
> Automated Home UK
> http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
> ____________________________________
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




____________________________________
Automated Home UK
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
____________________________________

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/