HC-8 stand alone or add on or both (Gen Info)

[jukingeo]

No, post it in the forum for the master controller (Prop-1 or Prop-2).  The logic is there, and simply sending commands to the HC-8+.

Ok, will do.

Controlling inductive AC loads is a very tricky process.  In our FC-4+ prototype we attempted to use triacs designed for vaccuum cleaner motors but found that they would not allow dimming, the would only allow on or off.  We went back to the original triac (same as in the FC-4) and it works beautifully, and has some of the cool things the HC-8+ has (RS-485 IO, TTL serial IO, two aux IO pins, DMX address, config header that supports uSD).  We'll talk more about the FC-4+ when it's ready.

Will the FC-4+ also be based on the Propeller IC?

Thank You,

Geo

[JonnyMac]

Will the FC-4+ also be based on the Propeller IC?

Yes, it is, and it has the same size and general layout as the HC-8+.

Of course, instead of having eight DC outputs the FC-4+ has one AC input (supply) and four AC outputs.  It only has two TTL compatible inputs instead of eight and, in fact, they are IO (these are in addition to the TTL serial IO pin. Everything else is the same and it uses 90% of the HC-8+ code. The difference is that we use and AC dimmer object in the FC-4+ versus the DC dimmer object in the HC-8+.  To go from the HC-8+ code to working FC-4+ code took about an hour. 

The RC-4+ will also take advantage of this code base.  No dimmer or fader manager required, though, it's just on and off (and the RC-4+ has three AC SSRs built in, and on form C relay for AC or DC control).

[jukingeo]

Will the FC-4+ also be based on the Propeller IC?

Yes, it is, and it has the same size and general layout as the HC-8+.

Of course, instead of having eight DC outputs the FC-4+ has one AC input (supply) and four AC outputs.  It only has two TTL compatible inputs instead of eight and, in fact, they are IO (these are in addition to the TTL serial IO pin. Everything else is the same and it uses 90% of the HC-8+ code. The difference is that we use and AC dimmer object in the FC-4+ versus the DC dimmer object in the HC-8+.  To go from the HC-8+ code to working FC-4+ code took about an hour. 

The RC-4+ will also take advantage of this code base.  No dimmer or fader manager required, though, it's just on and off (and the RC-4+ has three AC SSRs built in, and on form C relay for AC or DC control).

Will the FC-4+ also be able to do DMX/Renard?   Do you have an idea what that item will sell for?

Thank You,

Geo

[JonnyMac]

Will the FC-4+ also be able to do DMX/Renard?

As with the HC-8+, DMX is built in; all you have to do is set the SM option switch to ON and set the DMX address to the desired starting channel.

As you've seen, it's not hard to create a Renard interpreter for the HC-8+, that same code will run on the FC-4+.  Just remember that the Renard system uses eight-byte packets, so you would lose four channels.

Suggestion: Convert your Renard devices to DMX and use DMX.

Do you have an idea what that item will sell for?

No firm price yet; it will be more than the original FC-4 given the feature additions.

[jukingeo]

As with the HC-8+, DMX is built in; all you have to do is set the SM option switch to ON and set the DMX address to the desired starting channel.

As you've seen, it's not hard to create a Renard interpreter for the HC-8+, that same code will run on the FC-4+.  Just remember that the Renard system uses eight-byte packets, so you would lose four channels.

Ahhh, that is the catch.   Nope don't want to loose channels. 

Suggestion: Convert your Renard devices to DMX and use DMX.

I might do that with one of them.

Thank You,

Geo