FW: X10 replacement ?

["Kevin Hawkins" <lists@xxxxxxx>]

Really interesting stuff Ian - I hope it works out well - we need it now !



Just on the xAP side - you could of course truncate your names to be
whatever length you wanted within the xAP (and I think also xPL) current
specs meaning that you could use a.b.c instead of table.lamp.lounge - the
only knock on effect is that the devices must be unique and smaller names
limit the combinations. You would of course have the overhead of the rest
of
the xAP or xPL message structure but neither is large. Of course to support
wildcarding takes a bit more.

Additionally xAP has the UID field in the header - this is fantastic for
low
overhead address recognition - meaning that a receiver can recognise any
source in xAP by storing only 4 bytes - you can$B!G(Bt get much more
compact
than that. Even when you go to several switches say on one faceplate this
holds true (up to 254 switches on 65534 faceplates on each of 255 networks
!).



I see a great potential for another xAP gateway !



Kevin









-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Davidson [mailto:ian@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 23 April 2003 19:49
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] X10 replacement ?



Hi Frank

>Had a quick look at  your stuff very impressive......Are you using your
own
>protocol  or     xPL or xAP ???... How about putting leds on the light
>switches like the C_Bus ones ???..also a dry contact interface for
other kit
>to interface to .... Also Rob ....Shane Harrision has did a lighting
system
>based on Linet Modules........

I just hope the finished product is as good as your FIRM units Frank.
The protocol is my own based around the SNAP protocol.  I do like Both
xPL and xAP and still watch both camps. At the time I decided on my
route, xAP was to heavy a protocol table.lamp.lounge etc was far to many
bytes for what I needed. It needed Speed and the increase in speed in
the electronics would then be reduced by the overhead of the extra bytes
required for direct xAP etc. However I do like the systems and at some
time I would like to see a xAp or xPL front similar to the HUB approach
but limiting messages on the mains to only those necessary.

I would like to make a 4 way switch unit which would fit into a one gang
box. The only requirement being mains supply. The switches could then be
lit and on each press the command could go directly to a lamp unit. Very
fast, the PC interface would also be able to track the commands or ask
the status at any time.

>Sorry if i missed it but  does it have Status feedback
Yep.

>Good Luck
Thank you

Ian D




----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Davidson" <ian@xxxxxxx>
To: "HA Yahoo group UK (HA Yahoo group UK)" <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 6:54 AM
Subject: [ukha_d] X10 replacement ?


> Hi All
>
> A long time since my last post but I have been reading all the group
> mail. Since I moved house last year I also started to install some X10
> modules (at the old house I had some basic home made modules and some
> home made RF linked kit) but soon stopped as they seemed so slow and
> unreliable.  A few months ago I decided to build my own modules for
use
> around the house, all the lighting and some appliance modules etc.
> Although X10 is a very well established I didn't like it and decided
to
> start from scratch. I know there are others (CBUS looks very good) but
> they either were to expensive or required dedicated cabling to each
> point (or both).
>
> Anyway I've now got to the point of needing to get some PCB's designed
> but thought I would ask people what they thought so far and if anyone
> could suggest any improvements before I started on the PCB's (Hate
that
> job). Rather than explain everything here I've botched together a
> webpage to explain it so please have a look if you have the time and
let
> me know of any mistakes or improvements you can think of.
>
> http://www.galeforce9.co.uk/details1.htm
>
> I still have much to do especially on the PC software side but I
should
> get there in the end.
>
> Thanks
>
> Ian D
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ** UKHA2003 BE THERE! Details here:
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk/article.php3?story_id=1110
**
> 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
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>



** UKHA2003 BE THERE! Details here:
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk/article.php3?story_id=1110
**
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
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/