Re: DIN-rail switches, dimmers, etc - why ?

["Karam Karam" <kzkaram@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris,

Notwithstanding logic, sometimes market forces also have a role ;-).
Some customers still prefer to use or at least partly use the
centralised structure. Present installers feel more familiar with it -
at least for some aspects of the wiring. Also in some areas it makes
more sense to have a 'box' rather than a wall mounting device, for
example placing a switching/dimming unit in a loft.

On the other hand running analogue signals from sensors/switches back
to a centralised rats nest is not really so clever. When you consider
that a modest IDRATEK installation can easily utilise 100's of
sensors you can begin to appreciate this more clearly!

Since IDRATEK wall mounting modules can be easily inspected, removed
or replaced there is not really any issue with fault finding or
correction - unless people fit such modules in ceiling voids or such,
in which case we'd obviously recommend some method of access which
did not involve hacking plaster :-)

So in summary I guess we are providing additional choice and
capability with our DIN modules. They are all networked anyway so
have additional benefit of not needing to all be in the same location
(example of loft usage before).

Karam
IDRATEK LTD






--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, Chris Hunter <cjhunter@...> wrote:
>
>
> see a quad DIN-rail dimmer (4x 250W) with all the usual facilities
> (LEDs, GPI, etc) has just been released by Idratek ... they do DIN-
> rail relay units, too ... and I think C-Bus have similar things ...
>
> but
>
> the DIN-rail approach has been around for a while, of course, but
I'm
> struggling to understand the logic in the modern HA context ... it
> means wiring things (individual things, small groups of things)
all
> the way back to the consumer unit (or other such) ... which is not
> very economical in terms of wiring, and a lot more hassle when
fault-
> finding, surely ?
>
> I know great arrays of DIN units, with their LEDs, can look
> impressive, but isn't that approach is redundant now that full
views
> of what's going-on can be had via Cortex (in this case), Homeseer,
> Indigo, etc ... wouldn't it be  better to have the control units
> close to what they're controlling, in a less obtrusive format ... ??
>
> I'm missing something ...
>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> PS: any news of the DFP units that featured so enticingly as icons
in
> the Cortex V22 release notes ?
>