Triac vs MOS 3010 - DIY Direct Control of Hardware. Read Only. No more posting. - PlanetChristmas! Forums. Read Only. We've moved to http://talk.planetchristmas.com - The Forums of PlanetChristmas have moved to http://talk.PlanetChristmas.com
"I built a 64 channel controller with 64 SSR's and they can do dimming, special effects, etc."
With all due respect you later stated "This was actually my prototype and thus wasn’t functional without a few changes."
A lttle bait and switch there woundn't you say? You made it sound as if this is something people could use, not that it was a prototype requiring additional work.
It would have been nicer if you would have clarified the status of your design instaed of getting peopels hopes up that they might be able to use it.
I'm using DIO card and X10 with LOR software My questions was about using custom made/modified LOR hardware or non LOR manufactured hardware on the LOR serial bus. I wanted to make a 200 channel star where I could place the triacs at the sockets. LOR doesn't have that type of hardware. I could use DIO, but I want the special features, (fade, shimmer) etc.
Last edited on Wednesday December 20th, 2006 04:00 am by Douggg
LOR uses the drivers/software you get when you buy a DIO card.
Without any drivers/etc. LOR will not be able to pickup the hardware. Just as any other product.
You cannot just build SSR circuits, and expect a software product to 'pick up' that hardware and use it into it's application.
It's not an operating system software that can just 'pickup' anything you plug into a parallel,serial,or USB adapter.
Just like I stated before, even when I built my own SSR circuits, I still had to purchase the software drivers from the manufacturer for VB to be able to recognize the hardware.
You are particially right, it all depends on the hardware that's being uses. I would agree a DIO card requesres a driver, but would have to disagree when it comes to X10, and Dasher SCAB boards.
Douggg wrote: A lttle bait and switch there woundn't you say? You made it sound as if this is something people could use, not that it was a prototype requiring additional work.
Wow, a bit of a slap in the face.
The board is fully functional and is running my display right now. Yes it was my first board of this layout. I made a couple of errors in the layout and fixed them. I haven't had the time to create a new layout and update the schematic; Christmas happened, my display had to go up, I will resume this project shortly.
____________________ No really... Just one more light and I'll be finished....
Disclaimer: If you take any of what I say as non-constructive, it's not how I intended it.
ErnieHorning with all due respect you read your own post. "You stated that All of this information is free" and gave a URL on where to find it. You made it sound as if you had a fully functional solution you were sharing for free with everyone, I went there looking for plans and a schematic. It was rather disappointing to see only pictures and no plans. And then to learn it was a prototype that wasn't quite functional.
Sorry, if you thought my words were harsh, but in all of your posts you make it sound as if you have something for all of us, when in reality it still has a ways to go.
As I look around on Computer Christmas I find most of the info to be rather sketchy.
It's not fair or reasonable to criticize people for something that they didn't write or even imply. What he wrote was 'look what I did', which is totally in keeping with the DIY spirit of both this sub-forum (and with computerchristmas.com, for that matter). Neither place caters to the creation of detailed instructions of the type that you want, because the people who are creating new projects and designs are much more interested in figuring out how to put things together in new and novel ways than in duplicating someone else's design.
My intention when I initially wrote that how-to on computerchristmas.com was to present one example of such a project. The only part that I expected very many people to copy literally was the code for the PIC, which is the part that would be 'magical' for a lot of people (and there have even been people taking that and modifying it). The rest of the howto was just an example of how to use that part, with the idea that most people would not take it literally. There was no percentage in doing extremely detailed instructions, because I felt that most people would want to do it their own way, and would ask questions if they needed help. In addition, if someone needed the extremely detailed instructions, they would probably still have a slew of questions anyway, no matter how good the instructions were.
So, as I see it, your comments are unreasonable and unfair for a DIY group. There are a lot of companies out there selling kits that could probably be of much more use to you, some of them with their own forums on this board.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thogut this was a forum for the shairing of information.
In my post I was asking how to do something. I fail to see the point of a reply where someone says you could do it this way and then fails to provide only picture. And then later says it really isn't fully functional. It’s very frustrating and (my opinion) detracts from the usefullness of forums on Planet Christmas.
After looking at ComputerChristmas I think it’s his post info is complety appropiate. The posts on that form are examples of how to build circuits. I think the people on Planet Christmas are after workable solutions not just vague ideas.
The reason I posted my question on PC is so I could get usefull answers on how to solve the issues. I’m not trying to offend anyone, just get solutions.
With that said, it appears he is very talented. If he’s willing, I’m willing to work with him to come up with a workable soultion I’m willing to share with everyone on PC and CC.
>> I think the people on Planet Christmas are after workable solutions not just vague ideas.
In general, yes. In some other threads in this forum, yes. But your lead-off question in this topic was of a speculative nature, as were some of your responses later on. So I think that Ernie's response was completely appropriate, and not deserving of the response that it got. In fact, I think that it deserves an apology.
In any case, if this continues much longer, I think that both of us will end up in the time-out chair.
>> Anyone know if you can get several optoisolators (like 4) in one package?
I didn't see any suitable ones in the mouser catalog, nor in the on-line product selector at Digikey. The optos with diac/triac outputs all come one to the package. Not to say that they don't exist, they are just aren't common parts.
The closest to what you want are some big modules from Weidmuller at Digikey, but they are huge things that cost upwards of $150 each.
