| Author |
|
UpstateMike
Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: November 26 2006 at 12:52 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Anybody using an Ocelot for your hard wired inputs to PowerHome? I was wondering what the response time is like when using motion sensors and stuff? Also is it hard to set up on the Ocelot side? Do you have to use CMax to configure inputs in the Ocelot before you can use them with PowerHome?
Was just curious how this combo is working for the folks who are using it?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
UpstateMike
Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: December 06 2006 at 08:45 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Wow, not a single Ocelot user! I guess I asked the wrong question. What I should be asking is what are most folks using with PowerHome for connecting hardwired motion sensor inputs?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
smarty
Super User
Joined: May 21 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 728
|
| Posted: December 06 2006 at 10:59 | IP Logged
|
|
|
my 2 cents....
When the Elk "plugin" for PH is ready (upcoming beta I have heard), I plan to get zone information directly into PH that way.
Presently, I use an Xlobby Elk plugin (to see the M1 in Xlobby) and then use DCC sockets to send Xlobby information information to PH (convoluted  yes, reliable  yes, fast yes).
Steve
__________________
Elk - Insteon - BlueIris - DMC1 - PowerHome - XLobby - HA_Bridge w/Dots - Brultech
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
UpstateMike
Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: December 06 2006 at 12:55 | IP Logged
|
|
|
When the Elk integration is ready will PowerHome use the Elk as the Insteon Powerline Interface or will the M1 use PowerHome as it's Insteon PowerLine interface?
In other words where does the PowerLinc get connected?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
smarty
Super User
Joined: May 21 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 728
|
| Posted: December 06 2006 at 16:03 | IP Logged
|
|
|
That is a question for Dave, but I bet they will continue to each use their own.
I tend to think this because:
1) If the PH computer is off, the Elk could still control the lights (the PH PC likely not quite as bullet proof as the Elk controller is - no dig to PH).
2)The Elk Insteon functionality is NOT NEARLY as robust as it is with PH. PH gets some of thisfunctionality from the fact that it has the "SDM" running on the PC (and not just the PLC hanging on the powerline (did I say this right?).
__________________
Elk - Insteon - BlueIris - DMC1 - PowerHome - XLobby - HA_Bridge w/Dots - Brultech
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
dhoward
Admin Group
Joined: June 29 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4447
|
| Posted: December 07 2006 at 14:56 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Mike,
I have the Ocelot but am primarily using it for zoned infrared control (which works fantastic BTW).
I have a SECU-16 which I used to use to sense switch closures (magnetic contact) and the response time was excellent. The nice thing about the Ocelot and digital Inputs is that the Ocelot actually generates an event when the status changes and does not require any "polling" for this information. I would think that it would work nicely with hard-wired motion detectors and be extremely fast.
When the Elk integration is complete, it will be up to the user how they want to do the lighting. If they have the Insteon PLC connected to the Elk (via M1XSP), then Elk will control the Insteon lighting and PowerHome will be able to control the Elk. However, you will need to configure the lighting within PowerHome as X10 lighting since this is all the Elk understands and is essentially doing a "translation" of X10 device codes into Insteon addresses. IOW, the Elk doesnt expose anything about Insteon through it's interface and only understands lighting devices 0 thru 255 (A1 thru P16). And even that is not entirely accurate because in order to support Insteon PLC group functionality, the first 192 devices are reserved as individual devices and the last 64 devices correspond to Insteon PLC groups.
If you leave the PLC connected to PowerHome, then you'll of course control the lighting as Insteon but then the Elk wont be able to directly control it (Im not far enough into the development of the Elk interface to know yet but I would think that by setting one of the Elk variables or having the Elk "try" to control standard X10 lighting that PowerHome could trigger off of this and control the Insteon lighting indirectly. This of course assumes that PowerHome is always running and that the machine is not hung or similar).
It seems that the "best" method might be to have two PLC's, one connected to the Elk for direct control via the Elk and the other connected to PowerHome. I'll have more info on this as I delve deeper into the Elk interface.
Dave.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
UpstateMike
Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: December 08 2006 at 20:03 | IP Logged
|
|
|
So it looks like the cleanest way to have motion sensors control Insteon lights is with an Ocelot connected to PowerHome... even if you use an Elk for security and thermostats. How come nobody seems to be doing that?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
dhoward
Admin Group
Joined: June 29 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4447
|
| Posted: December 08 2006 at 22:27 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Probably too many different controllers for them  . Actually, you wouldnt have to have an Ocelot for the motion sensors if you already have an Elk. Once the Elk support is in place, my plan is to wire hard-wired motion sensors to the Elk and then trigger on them within PowerHome. I'll then have PowerHome control my Insteon lights.
I think most people dont do it this way because they don't want to be reliant upon a Windows computer for their basic automation tasks. This is one of the primary reasons I believe people move to the Elk or Stargate in the first place, reliability. In my situation however, I couldnt function without the extra control that the PC gives me. I do alot of infrared control for my Home Theater as well video distribution and to setup all the rules I have for IR codes would probably overload most dedicated controllers. I also like the TTS and the ability to control things using my cellphone or over the web. It seems that the best of both worlds would be to have the most basic aspects of automation in the dedicated controller with the extra "fluff" being provided by the PC.
Dave.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
UpstateMike
Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: December 09 2006 at 00:05 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Maybe I will go the Elk route as well... PowerHome will use the M1 Ethernet port to connect, right?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
smarty
Super User
Joined: May 21 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 728
|
| Posted: December 09 2006 at 20:34 | IP Logged
|
|
|
dhoward wrote:
Probably too many different controllers for them . Actually, you wouldnt have to have an Ocelot for the motion sensors if you already have an Elk. Once the Elk support is in place, my plan is to wire hard-wired motion sensors to the Elk and then trigger on them within PowerHome. I'll then have PowerHome control my Insteon lights.
I think most people dont do it this way because they don't want to be reliant upon a Windows computer for their basic automation tasks. This is one of the primary reasons I believe people move to the Elk or Stargate in the first place, reliability. In my situation however, I couldnt function without the extra control that the PC gives me. I do alot of infrared control for my Home Theater as well video distribution and to setup all the rules I have for IR codes would probably overload most dedicated controllers. I also like the TTS and the ability to control things using my cellphone or over the web. It seems that the best of both worlds would be to have the most basic aspects of automation in the dedicated controller with the extra "fluff" being provided by the PC.
Dave.
|
|
|
This is EXACLTY where my set-up has evolved to/is heading to, and for the EXACT reasons stated.
Edited by smarty - December 09 2006 at 20:35
__________________
Elk - Insteon - BlueIris - DMC1 - PowerHome - XLobby - HA_Bridge w/Dots - Brultech
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
dhoward
Admin Group
Joined: June 29 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4447
|
| Posted: December 18 2006 at 13:54 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Mike,
The next release that includes support for the Elk as a controller will NOT use the Ethernet port. You'll have to connect the serial cable directly to the M1 initially. I will add the support for the Ethernet interface immediately following though. I just first need to get an ethernet module so I can write the interface.
Dave.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
PowerHome Messageboard : PowerHome General
Topic: Using Ocelot With PowerHome
