RE: Newbie - controlling lights and creating scenes (Ocelot?)

["K. C. Li" <li@xxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 31 May 2003, Kevin Hawkins wrote:

>             There are two big issues with X10 - one is the actual
technology
> which is rather long in the tooth now. Whilst it is easy to retrofit
because

I disagree with that statement, bearing in mind that I am commercially
biased towards X-10 as you are commercially biased towards C-Bus.

Power Line Technology (PLT) is not "long in the tooth" but the
X-10
application of the technology could do with more frequent updates. PLT is
being used on a trial basis to deliver broadband services in the UK now so
it is hardly yesterday's technology. The standard X-10 command set is
fairly comprehensive and it is further enhanced by the addition of
X-10 Extended Commands.

> it uses your existing mains wiring it is fairly slow and prone to
being
> unreliable. The second issue is the range of products available in the
UK -

X-10 can be made to be almost as reliable as hardwired systems if
sufficient planning and preparation are done beforehand. Unlike a closed
and restrictive hardware system, X-10 sometimes gets the blame for all
kinds of problems that are beyond the control of X-10 itself. The inherent
speed of X-10 is indeed slow but, in my view, sufficiently fast for most
domestic and commercial applications that it is designed to control.

We have managed to produce X-10 modules that are up to ten times more
sensitive than standard X-10 modules and are much more tolerant on
interference. Again, it is not the technology itself that is the problem,
it is the application of it that sometimes causes reliability issues.

> they are not cosmetically attractive and offer limited functionality
at a
> much higher price than the US (bargain eh !). We have very few two way

I don't recall any retailers claiming that UK X-10 modules are bargains
but they are significantly cheaper than modules of other technologies. For
people that simply cannot lay down dedicated hardware infrastructure or
the high initial startup cost of other technologies, X-10 represent a
viable and effective solution.

> modules (which allow the status of a device to be read) nor two way
light
> switches for example. The issues you raise below are real issues that
I had

Two-way lighting can easily be achieved by the use of RF, MicroModule or
DIN rail modules. It is not as simple a replacement as other X-10 modules
are but it is not a great hardship to do ether.

Status response capability, although a desirable feature, is not as
essential as some people would think it is. The X-10 command set has
Status Request and Status Response as part of the standard protocol. The
feature is underused at the moment but more and more modules are being
launched with the feature. eg. AWM2 MicroModule. Two-way appliance and
lamp modules have been available for many years in the U.S. market but the
take-up rate has been disapppointing. The feature is really of
significance for computer controlled applications and, as always, there
are ways around the lack of the facility.

> expected to be resolved years ago by any sensible company wanting to
drive a
> growth market for X10.  Most people who are concerned over the
cosmetics

You are assuming your interpretation of the market demand is the same as
what is actually happening in the marketplace.

> lot more capable. There are a few alternative 'higher end' systems
around
> like Clipsal's C-Bus and Polaron but they require a small connector
cable to
> be run between all the switches etc.

I do not disagree with you on alternative and more capable systems but
they invariably require a minimum proprietary wiring infrastructure and
substantial investment on the system concerned.

>             Ian on this list is working on an alternative to X10 that
again
> uses the mains wiring for communication but is much faster and
reliable in
> that it supports two way communications (status). However it's a few
months
> off being available yet and may still require some partial rewiring in
your
> scenario.

While it is good to hear other emerging applications of PLT, would that
offer 100% reliability under all conditions as demanded on X-10? Would
modules be less expensive and more aesthetically pleasing as X-10?

>             Re the scene issues - although X10 is relatively slow it
is not
> unworkable for scenes although the sequential switching is quite
evident -

Again, it is the application of the function that is inadequate, not the
technology itself. Proper scene control is available on some 3rd party
X-10 modules. eg. SmartLinc. One of our own-designed lamp module will have
multiple scene capability with variable ramp rate using the X-10 Extended
Command. An example of variable ramp rate: Lamp modules that are currently
set to 30%, 60% and 70% dim levels can be commanded to a new dim level of,
say, 80% in 2 seconds. The modules will calculate their own ramp rates to
arrive at the desired 80% level within the time limit of two seconds
smoothly.

>             Lastly - just a comment - if you do go the route of some
'micro
> modules' that sit behind sockets then you must ensure that they are
wired in
> a way that complies with regulations and can switch whatever rated
load
> COULD be plugged into the socket. Really if you switch a 13A socket
then you
> should be able to handle 13A+ although fusing at lower currents is a
way

I agree. It is potentially dangerous to have mains sockets that are wired
to lamp modules. The possibility of plugging something that is not
"incandescant lamp only" into the socket and causes overheating
is too
high for comfort.

Regards,

Kwong Li
li@xxxxxxx
Laser Business Systems Ltd.
http://www.laser.com