Ardiono Gateway for wired sensors
-
I know that RF is handy for transferring data, but what about using LAN for data transfer? I have been thinking about this for some time now, and it is a bit of a side track, but I think that the option should exist to replace the 2.4GHz RF card with something like a Wiznet or USR-WIFI232 , and transfer any data to/from sensors and gateway that way. The option also exists to do this via wifi, which is also much more secure. I collaborated with MCV forum member RexBeckett to do this exact thing with another project, and I think that creating the functionality/option of using LAN for data transfer is a wise step. Another benefit to this would be to allow sensors to be powered via PoE, an option I am taking with my fan control project to be able to conceal my electronics in an electrical box inside the wall with no need for batteries and wall warts. I understand that the purpose here is to make existing equipment more secure, but I think that the extra couple dollars it would require to use Ethernet devices may be a worthwhile evolution to this project.
Thoughts?
-
I know that RF is handy for transferring data, but what about using LAN for data transfer? I have been thinking about this for some time now, and it is a bit of a side track, but I think that the option should exist to replace the 2.4GHz RF card with something like a Wiznet or USR-WIFI232 , and transfer any data to/from sensors and gateway that way. The option also exists to do this via wifi, which is also much more secure. I collaborated with MCV forum member RexBeckett to do this exact thing with another project, and I think that creating the functionality/option of using LAN for data transfer is a wise step. Another benefit to this would be to allow sensors to be powered via PoE, an option I am taking with my fan control project to be able to conceal my electronics in an electrical box inside the wall with no need for batteries and wall warts. I understand that the purpose here is to make existing equipment more secure, but I think that the extra couple dollars it would require to use Ethernet devices may be a worthwhile evolution to this project.
Thoughts?
@Vodden yes, you are right
but everything depends on the goalmain focus of MySensors is to build alternative to zwave sensors network
it should be not expansive (difference between nrf24 and any wifi is huge), easy for new comers (this why arduino), should be good for battery power (wireless sensors, indoor and outdoor), should be small (to mount behind wall switch for example)ZigBee is also a secured alternative, committing all the requirements except price
Price of NRF24 module is about $1 while for ZigBee is about $24
Wifi you will not find bellow $20, most probably it will be $50I do not see a benefit having PoE, because for PoE you need a special wire while for wall switch you have AC power presented and for the wireless sensor you have battery or solar
benefit of Ethernet is also questionable. For most sensors and most actuators you need to send just a few bytes of data. High throughput is not an issue. At least for everything except multimedia -
@hek said:
Yes, agree with @axillent on this.
What you are describing is a valid but different project. We won't be able to reuse much of the current libraries and coming hardware.
Keep hacking! People need mixes of technologies!
Cheers
I think with enough effort, there could be enough diversity within 'the project' to cover all the bases. I am lucky (or unlucky, depending on your perspective) enough to be doing renovations in the near future which will enable me to have Cat 6 running to every room in the house, which is why I am leaning toward the LAN path. Some rooms will be serviced by multiple Cat 6 runs, allowing for multiple devices. PoE doesn't require special wiring compared to regular Cat 5/Cat 6 as attested to by @axillent, but it does require a reasonably priced PoE injector or PoE switch (yikes, expensive), which I would require anyway for other aspects of my renovations, so it seems like the logical choice for me. Being able to conceal everything behind drywall, have no need for batteries, and not have random project boxes lurking about is also another big selling feature. It would be a 'medium cost' alternative with full price functionality and footprint. In the grand scheme of things I think this is still a viable alternative for me and possibly others, and as soon as I have a clue about Arduino sketch writing, I will give it a go.
@hek if the transfer protocol between sensor and gateway was changed to LAN instead of RF, would the Vera plug-in still work as-is?
-
@hek said:
Yes, agree with @axillent on this.
What you are describing is a valid but different project. We won't be able to reuse much of the current libraries and coming hardware.
Keep hacking! People need mixes of technologies!
Cheers
I think with enough effort, there could be enough diversity within 'the project' to cover all the bases. I am lucky (or unlucky, depending on your perspective) enough to be doing renovations in the near future which will enable me to have Cat 6 running to every room in the house, which is why I am leaning toward the LAN path. Some rooms will be serviced by multiple Cat 6 runs, allowing for multiple devices. PoE doesn't require special wiring compared to regular Cat 5/Cat 6 as attested to by @axillent, but it does require a reasonably priced PoE injector or PoE switch (yikes, expensive), which I would require anyway for other aspects of my renovations, so it seems like the logical choice for me. Being able to conceal everything behind drywall, have no need for batteries, and not have random project boxes lurking about is also another big selling feature. It would be a 'medium cost' alternative with full price functionality and footprint. In the grand scheme of things I think this is still a viable alternative for me and possibly others, and as soon as I have a clue about Arduino sketch writing, I will give it a go.
@hek if the transfer protocol between sensor and gateway was changed to LAN instead of RF, would the Vera plug-in still work as-is?
@Vodden said:
@hek if the transfer protocol between sensor and gateway was changed to LAN instead of RF, would the Vera plug-in still work as-is?
Hmm.. You could probably reuse some of it. You could store ip-numbers to you sensors instead of radio-id. And your sensors must have a way of contacting the vera/plugin or keep a connection open. Not sure how this could be achieved.
Another option is create something (service running somewhere in your network) that simulate the serial protocol used by the plugin at keep it intact.
-
@Vodden said:
@hek if the transfer protocol between sensor and gateway was changed to LAN instead of RF, would the Vera plug-in still work as-is?
Hmm.. You could probably reuse some of it. You could store ip-numbers to you sensors instead of radio-id. And your sensors must have a way of contacting the vera/plugin or keep a connection open. Not sure how this could be achieved.
Another option is create something (service running somewhere in your network) that simulate the serial protocol used by the plugin at keep it intact.
@hek said:
And your sensors must have a way of contacting the vera/plugin or keep a connection open. Not sure how this could be achieved.
If the gateway arduino was still in place, but with a LAN connection on both the sensor and gateway side (ether Cat 5/6 or Wifi), would it work in the same manner? The relationship between the gateway and the vera does not change, only the manner in which it transmits/receives data from the sensors.
-
@hek said:
And your sensors must have a way of contacting the vera/plugin or keep a connection open. Not sure how this could be achieved.
If the gateway arduino was still in place, but with a LAN connection on both the sensor and gateway side (ether Cat 5/6 or Wifi), would it work in the same manner? The relationship between the gateway and the vera does not change, only the manner in which it transmits/receives data from the sensors.
-
@hek said:
And your sensors must have a way of contacting the vera/plugin or keep a connection open. Not sure how this could be achieved.
If the gateway arduino was still in place, but with a LAN connection on both the sensor and gateway side (ether Cat 5/6 or Wifi), would it work in the same manner? The relationship between the gateway and the vera does not change, only the manner in which it transmits/receives data from the sensors.
@Vodden I will question a need of the gateway in case of using Ethernet (wired or wireless)
Sensors directly connected to Ethernet can communicate to vera directly without any gateway
Think on benefits of using IP-to-IP gateway
At a first glance I do not see benefitsRadio gateway in opposite is a required bridge between 2.4MGz radio and vera
vera do not listen to that radio by itself -
@Vodden I also am doing a Reno and have the option of putting in cabling throughout the house. As I already have POE camera's to install I have a POE switch. So was looking into options of at least powering the sensors with POE.
I have based my sensors around the Nano so wanted to convert the POE output to USB voltage and ideally plug the sensor in using a USB cable.After some research this seems to give me the POE to 5V for $13
http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=26091&cPath=1657&utm_source=googlebase&utm_medium=cse&utm_campaign=export_feed#googlebaseThe sensor package itself will still be cheapish as most of the arduinos will be running more than one sensor. It is also cheaper and easier than using an Ethernet shield and having to hack it onto the Nano's
All I need now is to find a cable with a jack on one end to a USB mini. Anyone have any ideas?
