Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
We want to install some lighting in a summer house and it seems to us
that some sort of remote wireless switching would make sense as the switches are going to be a *long* way from the lights and it will be difficult to hide the wires. There is a 'proper' mains supply already installed with a sub-CU with 6A breaker for the lighting. (With an RCD main switch). The lights we want to control will probably mostly be 12 volt LEDs with a transformer to supply them. I did a quick Google Shopping look for 'wireless light switch' and there seem to be a bewildering variety of them, how do I choose? Are there standards such that different makes will interwork or is that a faint hope? I'm quite happy to D-I-Y from quite low level stuff if that makes sense from the price/function point of view. I buy and build quite a lot of electronics stuff from Rapid Recall, CPC, etc. One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. Any/all recommendations and ideas would be very welcome. -- Chris Green · |
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
|
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Chris Green wrote:
We want to install some lighting in a summer house and it seems to us that some sort of remote wireless switching would make sense as the switches are going to be a *long* way from the lights and it will be difficult to hide the wires. There is a 'proper' mains supply already installed with a sub-CU with 6A breaker for the lighting. (With an RCD main switch). The lights we want to control will probably mostly be 12 volt LEDs with a transformer to supply them. I did a quick Google Shopping look for 'wireless light switch' and there seem to be a bewildering variety of them, how do I choose? Are there standards such that different makes will interwork or is that a faint hope? I'm quite happy to D-I-Y from quite low level stuff if that makes sense from the price/function point of view. I buy and build quite a lot of electronics stuff from Rapid Recall, CPC, etc. One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. Any/all recommendations and ideas would be very welcome. I bought one years ago and its worked faultlessly ever since. It appears to be a discontinued brand however so thats not hugely helpful to you I know. (Home Easy). If I were buying again Id go for one with kinetic switches (no batteries needed) instead although Ive never had to replace mine in the last 8 or so years. Something like this. Wireless Lights Switch Kit,No Battery No Wires No Wi-Fi Required,150feet Operating Range,Easy to Install,Remote Control Lights Ceiling Fans House Lighting Lamps,Replace Wall Switch Can Mount Anywhere https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GPK3C..._YTMICb6B7X80H Tim -- Please don't feed the trolls |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
In article ,
Chris Green wrote: One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. I doubt most remotes would work over that distance. -- *Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 14/03/2019 11:51, Chris Green wrote:
We want to install some lighting in a summer house and it seems to us that some sort of remote wireless switching would make sense as the switches are going to be a *long* way from the lights and it will be difficult to hide the wires. There is a 'proper' mains supply already installed with a sub-CU with 6A breaker for the lighting. (With an RCD main switch). The lights we want to control will probably mostly be 12 volt LEDs with a transformer to supply them. I did a quick Google Shopping look for 'wireless light switch' and there seem to be a bewildering variety of them, how do I choose? Are there standards such that different makes will interwork or is that a faint hope? I'm quite happy to D-I-Y from quite low level stuff if that makes sense from the price/function point of view. I buy and build quite a lot of electronics stuff from Rapid Recall, CPC, etc. One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. Any/all recommendations and ideas would be very welcome. The Quinetic ones are very good and can get 1 2 or 3 switches in a standard wall plate. Sold by TLC and possibly others. I tested one from the bottom of my garden to the road which is about 180 feet. They don't lose sync during power cuts. Fairly easy to open up and modify say for momentary action such as turning on the heating. Bob |
#6
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article , Chris Green wrote: One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. I doubt most remotes would work over that distance. Our garage door opener remotes do, pretty reliably, and they presumably use the same 433MHz sort of technology. I was just hoping/expecting light switch remotes to be similar. This is outdoors, line of sight, no obstructions. -- Chris Green · |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Chris Green wrote
We want to install some lighting in a summer house and it seems to us that some sort of remote wireless switching would make sense as the switches are going to be a *long* way from the lights and it will be difficult to hide the wires. The obvious thing to use there is the Philips Hue system. There is a 'proper' mains supply already installed with a sub-CU with 6A breaker for the lighting. (With an RCD main switch). Thats all you need with the Hue system. The lights we want to control will probably mostly be 12 volt LEDs with a transformer to supply them. Makes more sense to use 240V bulbs and led strips now. I did a quick Google Shopping look for 'wireless light switch' and there seem to be a bewildering variety of them, how do I choose? A system that does all you currently want to do and what you might well want to do there in the future. And which you can use in the rest of the house later as well. Are there standards such that different makes will interwork Zigbee is that. or is that a faint hope? Nope. I'm quite happy to D-I-Y from quite low level stuff if that makes sense from the price/function point of view. It doesnt with function anymore. I buy and build quite a lot of electronics stuff from Rapid Recall, CPC, etc. One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. Hue is ideal for that situation, there is even an entirely mechanical switch which doesnt even us a battery which needs no wires at all and which can be placed anywhere. It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. Any/all recommendations and ideas would be very welcome. Hue is ideal for that situation. Not cheap tho and doesnt currently have any LED panels. Amazon periodically has well discounted specials and you can use any of the european amazons too. Dont use amazon.com tho for any of the mains powered bulbs. |
#8
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 06:29:14 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: The obvious thing to use there is the Philips Hue system. **** you and your Philips Hue system, you retarded piece of senile troll****! LOL -- Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot: "Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)" MID: |
#9
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 14/03/2019 11:51, Chris Green wrote:
We want to install some lighting in a summer house and it seems to us that some sort of remote wireless switching would make sense as the switches are going to be a *long* way from the lights and it will be difficult to hide the wires. Got some of these at work. Love them. https://glstouch.co.uk/kinetic Dunno about the distances you mention though. |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Tim+ Wrote in message:
Chris Green wrote: We want to install some lighting in a summer house and it seems to us that some sort of remote wireless switching would make sense as the switches are going to be a *long* way from the lights and it will be difficult to hide the wires. There is a 'proper' mains supply already installed with a sub-CU with 6A breaker for the lighting. (With an RCD main switch). The lights we want to control will probably mostly be 12 volt LEDs with a transformer to supply them. I did a quick Google Shopping look for 'wireless light switch' and there seem to be a bewildering variety of them, how do I choose? Are there standards such that different makes will interwork or is that a faint hope? I'm quite happy to D-I-Y from quite low level stuff if that makes sense from the price/function point of view. I buy and build quite a lot of electronics stuff from Rapid Recall, CPC, etc. One set of lights will (probably) be operated by a fixed 'switch' on the wall in the summer house but others might want more distant (50 to 100 metres maybe) operation with a plip type remote. Any/all recommendations and ideas would be very welcome. I bought one years ago and it?s worked faultlessly ever since. It appears to be a discontinued brand however so that?s not hugely helpful to you I know. (?Home Easy?). If I were buying again I?d go for one with kinetic switches (no batteries needed) instead although I?ve never had to replace mine in the last 8 or so years. Something like this. Wireless Lights Switch Kit,No Battery No Wires No Wi-Fi Required,150feet Operating Range,Easy to Install,Remote Control Lights Ceiling Fans House Lighting Lamps,Replace Wall Switch Can Mount Anywhere https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GPK3C..._YTMICb6B7X80H Tim "Long lifetime:About 3 years " What happens after 3 years? -- Jim K ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 14/03/2019 19:29, Rod Speed wrote:
snip Hue sales pitch It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. snip more Hue sales pitch |
#12
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. Thats what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ob_title_light |
#13
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? -- Roger Hayter |
#14
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 15/03/2019 15:21, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. Thats what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ob_title_light So what you are now saying is it uses mechanical energy to generate a wireless signal. |
#15
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 02:21:43 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: You were doing well until this point. Thats what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ob_title_light Just do as ordered and stuff your Philips Hues up yours ...once you managed to pull your head out of your senile arse! -- Norman Wells addressing senile Rot: "Ah, the voice of scum speaks." MID: |
#16
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Roger Hayter wrote:
Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. -- Chris Green · |
#17
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. It has to be by the kinetic energy of the finger press. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? Zigbee is in fact by far the best approach because not only does it get repeated by all the bulbs and battery powered sensors like the motion sensors, its a proper non proprietary standard that lets you use other than Hue devices on your Hue system. |
#18
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Fredxx wrote:
On 15/03/2019 15:21, Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...g-Synthetics/d p/B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light So what you are now saying is it uses mechanical energy to generate a wireless signal. Designing a nano-scale 433MHz dynamotor might be an interesting exercise for a graduate student, but hard to modulate. I am imagining a special cam. But I suspect they convert the force to electrical power first, perhaps piezoelectric? -- Roger Hayter |
#19
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Fredxx" wrote in message ... On 15/03/2019 15:21, Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. Thats what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ob_title_light So what you are now saying is it uses mechanical energy to generate a wireless signal. It actually uses kinetic energy from the button press. Philips has spelt that out but I am about to head out for the garage sale run so you will have to find that yourself. |
#20
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Rod Speed wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. It has to be by the kinetic energy of the finger press. I would not describe applying a force of a few hundred grams over a millimetre or so as "kinetic" energy. Unless you cut off your fingers and throw them at the switch. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? Zigbee is in fact by far the best approach because not only does it get repeated by all the bulbs and battery powered sensors like the motion sensors, it's a proper non proprietary standard that lets you use other than Hue devices on your Hue system. Not Wifi then. -- Roger Hayter |
#21
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. Thats because thats what they are. They dont use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. |
#22
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Roger Hayter wrote:
Fredxx wrote: On 15/03/2019 15:21, Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...g-Synthetics/d p/B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light So what you are now saying is it uses mechanical energy to generate a wireless signal. Designing a nano-scale 433MHz dynamotor might be an interesting exercise for a graduate student, but hard to modulate. I am imagining a special cam. But I suspect they convert the force to electrical power first, perhaps piezoelectric? Apologies. I mean an RF alternator, not a dynamotor. -- Roger Hayter |
#23
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Rod Speed wrote:
"Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ting-Synthetic s/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. That's because that's what they are. They don't use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. But the energy supplied is nothing to do with the speed of the press. The energy provided by the finger is force times distance moved. This is not kinetic energy at any stage, or if it is, only internal to the machine. The energy supplied by the operator is not kinetic energy. -- Roger Hayter |
#24
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Rod Speed wrote:
"Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. Thats because thats what they are. They dont use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. Use of kinetic energy would be use of energy from slowing down something that's already in motion. Turning a handle or pushing a lever is simply 'work' as in force x distance. -- Chris Green · |
#25
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 05:49:52 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. Thats because thats what they are. They dont use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. Is this still about your Philips Hue ****, psycho? SHOVE that up yours! -- Bill Wright to Rot Speed: "That confirms my opinion that you are a despicable little ****." MID: |
#26
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 05:13:08 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. It has to be by the kinetic energy of the finger press. No, it hasn't, senile idiot! But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? Zigbee is in fact by far the best approach because not only does it get repeated by all the bulbs and battery powered sensors like the motion sensors, its a proper non proprietary standard that lets you use other than Hue devices on your Hue system. Is this STILL about your Philips Hue ****? Well, shove those up your arse (after you pulled your head out first)! -- Sqwertz to Rot Speed: "This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative asshole. MID: |
#27
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 05:33:20 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: So what you are now saying is it uses mechanical energy to generate a wireless signal. It actually uses kinetic energy from the button press. There is NO "kinetic energy" in the button, senile idiot! Philips has spelt that out but I am about to head out for the garage sale run so you will have to find that yourself. Well, get lost then, senile pest! -- Norman Wells addressing senile Rot: "Ah, the voice of scum speaks." MID: |
#28
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Fredxx wrote: On 15/03/2019 15:21, Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...g-Synthetics/d p/B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light So what you are now saying is it uses mechanical energy to generate a wireless signal. Designing a nano-scale 433MHz dynamotor might be an interesting exercise for a graduate student, but hard to modulate. I am imagining a special cam. But I suspect they convert the force to electrical power first, perhaps piezoelectric? They wouldnt call it kinetic if they did it that way. They arent cheap and I dont have one so I dont plan to tear one down to see how they work. Big Clive might well have tho. |
#29
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: "Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. It has to be by the kinetic energy of the finger press. I would not describe applying a force of a few hundred grams over a millimetre or so as "kinetic" energy. They all do anyway. It isnt just Philips that has one. Unless you cut off your fingers and throw them at the switch. Unlikely to sell well dont like that. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? Zigbee is in fact by far the best approach because not only does it get repeated by all the bulbs and battery powered sensors like the motion sensors, it's a proper non proprietary standard that lets you use other than Hue devices on your Hue system. Not Wifi then. Yes, it is, zigbee is just one flavor of wifi. The bridge plugs into your router using a cat 5 cable and uses the router wifi. The bridge doesn't do its own wifi. |
#30
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: "Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ting-Synthetic s/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. That's because that's what they are. They don't use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. But the energy supplied is nothing to do with the speed of the press. Yes, thats just used to generate a small amount of electrical power. The energy provided by the finger is force times distance moved. Wrong with an electrical generator that uses the kinetic energy. This is not kinetic energy at any stage, Wrong. or if it is, only internal to the machine. Irrelevant. The energy supplied by the operator is not kinetic energy. Wrong. Just as wrong as your claim that zigbee isnt wifi. |
#31
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 09:43:20 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: They wouldnt call it kinetic if they did it that way. They aren't "kinetic" anyway, senile psychopath. They arent cheap and I dont have one so I dont plan to tear one down to see how they work. Thanks for providing everyone with that useless information, senile bigmouth! -- Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp addressing Rot Speed: "You really are a clueless pillock." MID: |
#32
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 15/03/2019 23:03, Rod Speed wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: "Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ting-Synthetic s/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information.* But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. That's because that's what they are. They don't use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. But the energy supplied is nothing to do with the speed of the press. Yes, thats just used to generate a small amount of electrical power. The energy provided by the finger is force times distance moved. Wrong with an electrical generator that uses the kinetic energy. This is not kinetic energy at any stage, Wrong. Explain what kinetic energy is? It shouldn't be difficult unless google is beyond your ability. or if it is, only internal to the machine. Irrelevant. The energy supplied by the operator is not kinetic energy. Wrong. Just as wrong as your claim that zigbee isnt wifi. Zigbee is a complete protocol stack and a form of low power, low data rate radio communication. You can call it wireless if you like. Wifi is a name given to a specific standard IEEE 802.11, you can call it wireless if you like. BTW, Wi-Fi is a trademark of the Wi-Fi Alliance. Only an idiot would confuse the two as being the same. |
#33
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Chris Green" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: "Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...Synthetics/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. Thats because thats what they are. They dont use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. Use of kinetic energy would be use of energy from slowing down something that's already in motion. And thats what happens when the finger presses the button. You need to press the button a bit harder than most buttons. Turning a handle or pushing a lever is simply 'work' as in force x distance. But pressing it with your finger isnt either. |
#34
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 10:03:33 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: Wrong with an electrical generator that uses the kinetic energy. This is not kinetic energy at any stage, Wrong. or if it is, only internal to the machine. Irrelevant. The energy supplied by the operator is not kinetic energy. Wrong. Just as wrong as your claim that zigbee isnt wifi. Man, you need to get institutionalized, you senile psychopathic swine! Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if you were trolling from a mental hospital! tsk -- Richard addressing Rot Speed: "**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll." MID: |
#35
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 10:24:53 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: Use of kinetic energy would be use of energy from slowing down something that's already in motion. And thats what happens when the finger presses the button. You need to press the button a bit harder than most buttons. Turning a handle or pushing a lever is simply 'work' as in force x distance. But pressing it with your finger isnt either. Get treatment, you auto-contradicting senile psychopath! -- Bill Wright to Rot Speed: "That confirms my opinion that you are a despicable little ****." MID: |
#36
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Lonely Psychopathic Senile Ozzie Troll Alert! LOL
On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 09:58:40 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again: FLUSH more senile troll**** -- Bill Wright to Rot Speed: "That confirms my opinion that you are a despicable little ****." MID: |
#37
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 15/03/2019 23:24, Rod Speed wrote:
"Chris Green" wrote in message snip Turning a handle or pushing a lever is simply 'work' as in force x distance. But pressing it with your finger isnt either. So when you press this 'switch' with a finger, you're not applying a force which moves a finite distance? Or isn't "work = force x distance" any more? When did that change? |
#38
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
"Fredxx" wrote in message ... On 15/03/2019 23:03, Rod Speed wrote: "Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: "Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ting-Synthetic s/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information. But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. That's because that's what they are. They don't use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. But the energy supplied is nothing to do with the speed of the press. Yes, thats just used to generate a small amount of electrical power. The energy provided by the finger is force times distance moved. Wrong with an electrical generator that uses the kinetic energy. This is not kinetic energy at any stage, Wrong. Explain what kinetic energy is? Look it up for yourself. And its the kinetic energy of the finger stopping that the button that is what generates the small amount of power needed to power the zigbee transmitter. It shouldn't be difficult unless google is beyond your ability. Dont need to goggle it, I have know what it is for 3/4 of a century, thanks. or if it is, only internal to the machine. Irrelevant. The energy supplied by the operator is not kinetic energy. Wrong. Just as wrong as your claim that zigbee isnt wifi. Zigbee is a complete protocol stack and a form of low power, low data rate radio communication. You can call it wireless if you like. Wifi is a name given to a specific standard IEEE 802.11, And zigbee is the name of the protocol that is done over that. you can call it wireless if you like. I can call it wifi too. BTW, Wi-Fi is a trademark of the Wi-Fi Alliance. Whoopy ****ing do. Only an idiot would confuse the two as being the same. Never said they are the same, idiot. |
#39
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote Chris Green wrote Turning a handle or pushing a lever is simply 'work' as in force x distance. But pressing it with your finger isnt either. So when you press this 'switch' with a finger, you're not applying a force which moves a finite distance? Corse you are, but its the kinetic energy of the finger that is what generates the small amount of power that powers the chip that transmits the zigbee signal to the base. Or isn't "work = force x distance" any more? Pity its the kinetic energy of the finger that is what generates the small amount of power that powers the chip that transmits the zigbee signal to the base. When did that change? It didnt, stupid. |
#40
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Wireless switches for lights - recommendations?
On 16/03/2019 00:39, Rod Speed wrote:
"Fredxx" wrote in message ... On 15/03/2019 23:03, Rod Speed wrote: "Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote: "Chris Green" wrote in message ... Roger Hayter wrote: Rod Speed wrote: Fredxx wrote Rod Speed wrote It uses kinetic energy to send a wifi signal to the base. You were doing well until this point. That's what it does. No battery no wires. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philips-Per...ting-Synthetic s/dp/ B0748MQWP3/ref=dp_ob_title_light I'd prefer to call it mechanical rather then kinetic energy, without further information.* But perhaps he was suggesting that Wifi was not really an appropriate radio protocol for the purpose? All the makers and sellers of them call them kinetic for some strange reason. That's because that's what they are. They don't use the static force of the finger on the button, they use the movement of the button. But the energy supplied is nothing to do with the speed of the press. Yes, thats just used to generate a small amount of electrical power. The energy provided by the finger is force times distance moved. Wrong with an electrical generator that uses the kinetic energy. This is not kinetic energy at any stage, Wrong. Explain what kinetic energy is? Look it up for yourself. And its the kinetic energy of the finger stopping that the button that is what generates the small amount of power needed to power the zigbee transmitter. I have, and you continue to show you're clueless. It shouldn't be difficult unless google is beyond your ability. Dont need to goggle it, I have know what it is for 3/4 of a century, thanks. Sound like googling is beyond you. or if it is, only internal to the machine. Irrelevant. The energy supplied by the operator is not kinetic energy. Wrong. Just as wrong as your claim that zigbee isnt wifi. Zigbee is a complete protocol stack and a form of low power, low data rate radio communication. You can call it wireless if you like. Wifi is a name given to a specific standard IEEE 802.11, And zigbee is the name of the protocol that is done over that. you can call it wireless if you like. I can call it wifi too. Only someone with a lack of knowledge would call it wifi. BTW, Wi-Fi is a trademark of the Wi-Fi Alliance. Whoopy ****ing do. Which is a standard associated with IEEE 802.11 Being wrong is so painful for you. Only an idiot would confuse the two as being the same. Never said they are the same, idiot. You're the idiot that said, "Just as wrong as your claim that zigbee isnt wifi", whatever did you mean by that? |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|