ᐅ Which control system? Managing heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) with an app
Created on: 25 Dec 2017 18:02
D
Dark_Templar
Hello everyone,
I am about to start building and have the following systems planned. However, I am not sure how to best implement them.
Heating: Viessmann Vitodens 300-W
Ventilation: Zehnder Q450
Air conditioning: Daikin Emura (living room + child’s bedroom 1 + child’s bedroom 2)
Door communication: Open, target setup: video + preferably fingerprint
Home cinema (on the living floor): motorized screen + motorized curtain
I would like to control heating, ventilation, and air conditioning via apps. Each manufacturer offers a separate app for this, which would be acceptable to me.
On the living floor, I want to control 4 blinds, at least 4 lighting zones, the motorized screen, and the motorized curtain via a touch panel. Ideally, this panel would be the same one used for door communication. I want to control all other floors conventionally.
How would you organize this?
I am about to start building and have the following systems planned. However, I am not sure how to best implement them.
Heating: Viessmann Vitodens 300-W
Ventilation: Zehnder Q450
Air conditioning: Daikin Emura (living room + child’s bedroom 1 + child’s bedroom 2)
Door communication: Open, target setup: video + preferably fingerprint
Home cinema (on the living floor): motorized screen + motorized curtain
I would like to control heating, ventilation, and air conditioning via apps. Each manufacturer offers a separate app for this, which would be acceptable to me.
On the living floor, I want to control 4 blinds, at least 4 lighting zones, the motorized screen, and the motorized curtain via a touch panel. Ideally, this panel would be the same one used for door communication. I want to control all other floors conventionally.
How would you organize this?
Hello,
when it comes to home automation, KNX is essential. And sorry 11ant, a PLC is definitely more than unsuitable for home automation. You can use it additionally in the distribution board for certain purposes (I do this with a Wago 750 as well), but just the entire sensor system (presence detectors, motion sensors, push-buttons, etc.) is a nightmare with a PLC. Especially if you want feedback or information, nothing beats KNX.
Regarding the wiring, I agree with you. A star topology with 5x1.5 mm² (5x15 AWG) or 5x2.5 mm² (5x14 AWG) cables to the distribution panel offers maximum flexibility.
when it comes to home automation, KNX is essential. And sorry 11ant, a PLC is definitely more than unsuitable for home automation. You can use it additionally in the distribution board for certain purposes (I do this with a Wago 750 as well), but just the entire sensor system (presence detectors, motion sensors, push-buttons, etc.) is a nightmare with a PLC. Especially if you want feedback or information, nothing beats KNX.
Regarding the wiring, I agree with you. A star topology with 5x1.5 mm² (5x15 AWG) or 5x2.5 mm² (5x14 AWG) cables to the distribution panel offers maximum flexibility.
Dark_Templar schrieb:
Which system would you recommend? I’ll try to give a less dogmatic and less polemical answer:
If future-proofing is important to you—meaning that many manufacturers exist who continue to offer compatible components even after one competitor disappears—I would go with a standardized system such as KNX. Additionally, you have a wide range of devices and can choose from a large selection.
If that is not so important to you and you don’t mind being dependent on a single manufacturer, there are other options. Loxone is often mentioned as an example here.
That these alternatives are by default just gimmicks or more error-prone, leading to higher maintenance costs, belongs in the realm of myths—and it’s no surprise to hear that from a KNX enthusiast who sometimes borders on being a fanboy...
A well-planned and properly implemented Loxone system tailored to the user’s needs will fulfill its purpose and work just as well. Period.
A poorly planned KNX system will just as surely miss the user’s needs and become a money pit. Again, period.
The differences lie in the technical infrastructure, vendor dependency, and how the product portfolio is managed. I would consider those carefully but would not let anyone convince me that there is only one right choice and everything else is nonsense.
Two things often said about Loxone are: simpler configuration and lower installation costs compared to KNX.
Regarding the first point, I can’t really comment; regarding the second, I can at least say in my case, an equivalent KNX setup was definitely not more expensive and actually showed no price advantage for Loxone, rather a slight price disadvantage.
I chose KNX because of the greater diversity of products and independence from a single company.
Tom1607 schrieb:
Hello,
when it comes to home automation, KNX is the standard. And sorry 11ant, PLCs are definitely not suitable for home automation. You can use them additionally in the distribution board for specific purposes (I do this with a Wago 750 as well), but all the sensors (power meters, motion detectors, switches, etc.) are a nightmare to handle with a PLC. Especially if you want feedback or information, nothing beats KNX.
However, I agree with you about the wiring. Everything wired in a star topology with 5x1.5 or 5x2.5 (5x1/1.5 mm² or 5x2.5 mm²) to the distribution board offers maximum flexibility. I do everything with a Wago 750-889. This controller can handle KNX but I don’t have any KNX actuators or sensors installed.
For switches, I use 8-gang switches with feedback LEDs, which means 18 wires per switch panel plus 2 wires for the PT100 temperature sensor. So, I run 20x 0.5mm² (20x 0.2 inch²) wires to each switch.
The visualization is done with OpenHAB. The heating is fully controlled via my Wago with its own regulation. The door stations and cameras are all integrated into the visualization using a flash component. Lighting is partly controlled via Philips Hue because of the Ambilight feature for the TV, the rest through RGB dimmers connected directly to the Wago. The weather station and heating temperatures are also managed via Wago.
This setup costs me about half as much as KNX and is more flexible since the Wago supports almost all protocols or can be integrated accordingly.
When I read here that I need 20 conductors, that’s where I draw the line. If I have to connect wires in each outlet for an hour and then do it all again in the distribution board, nobody will pay me for that.
That might be fine if you do it yourself, but not if you hire an electrician for the job.
As I said, this is just my opinion, and no, I don’t see myself as a fanboy—I make my living from work like this. Actually, I could join many other electricians in saying that KNX is 300% more expensive than standard wiring. That would make me more money…
But from my perspective, installing a KNX system involves much less effort (just considering drilling, chasing channeling, etc.), so I spend less time on these tasks. You do spend more time working at the distribution board, and you need a bigger one. BUT working inside a distribution board is much more comfortable than struggling with dozens of conductors in an outlet box.
And whenever a customer wants something beyond the usual standard, it puts a smile on my face. How often does a client suddenly say in the middle of construction,
“Uh, I’d also like the light/blind/socket to be controlled from here…”
To me, that means a relaxed “No problem, we’ll fix that.” Anyone who has built a house knows this situation. I had this recently—the plasterer was already finished, and the homeowner wanted a few changes. Apart from a 150cm (5 feet) chase and a flush-mounted box for an EIB cable and a simple reconnection in the distribution board, that was it.
Traditionally, that would have meant removing half of the electrical installation. It would have been unaffordable, and the client would have been annoyed over and over. With KNX, it cost about €200 (plus materials) in labor.
And this wouldn’t have been possible with a PLC in that form either. But since KNX places no high demands on topology, it’s usually not a problem.
These are all advantages that customers “normally” don’t consider.
That’s why my recommendation is KNX with EVERYTHING wired star-shaped to the distribution board. Above all, during planning, EVERY small wish should be mentioned. That way, you can decide whether it makes sense to include preparations such as reserve bus cables in flush-mounted boxes.
As always in life, everyone should consider what is right for them and implement (or have it implemented) accordingly.
That might be fine if you do it yourself, but not if you hire an electrician for the job.
As I said, this is just my opinion, and no, I don’t see myself as a fanboy—I make my living from work like this. Actually, I could join many other electricians in saying that KNX is 300% more expensive than standard wiring. That would make me more money…
But from my perspective, installing a KNX system involves much less effort (just considering drilling, chasing channeling, etc.), so I spend less time on these tasks. You do spend more time working at the distribution board, and you need a bigger one. BUT working inside a distribution board is much more comfortable than struggling with dozens of conductors in an outlet box.
And whenever a customer wants something beyond the usual standard, it puts a smile on my face. How often does a client suddenly say in the middle of construction,
“Uh, I’d also like the light/blind/socket to be controlled from here…”
To me, that means a relaxed “No problem, we’ll fix that.” Anyone who has built a house knows this situation. I had this recently—the plasterer was already finished, and the homeowner wanted a few changes. Apart from a 150cm (5 feet) chase and a flush-mounted box for an EIB cable and a simple reconnection in the distribution board, that was it.
Traditionally, that would have meant removing half of the electrical installation. It would have been unaffordable, and the client would have been annoyed over and over. With KNX, it cost about €200 (plus materials) in labor.
And this wouldn’t have been possible with a PLC in that form either. But since KNX places no high demands on topology, it’s usually not a problem.
These are all advantages that customers “normally” don’t consider.
That’s why my recommendation is KNX with EVERYTHING wired star-shaped to the distribution board. Above all, during planning, EVERY small wish should be mentioned. That way, you can decide whether it makes sense to include preparations such as reserve bus cables in flush-mounted boxes.
As always in life, everyone should consider what is right for them and implement (or have it implemented) accordingly.
Hi @Tom1607,
no worries, you weren’t being called a fanboy. A question for the expert regarding the star-shaped wiring layout. Suppose you have a triple socket outlet on each side of a wall. Do you run each outlet with a separate 5x2.5mm² (5x14 AWG) or 5x1.5mm² (5x16 AWG) cable, so that each socket can be switched individually? Or do you only run a single 5x2.5mm² (5x14 AWG) cable for both triple outlets combined, providing constant power plus two switchable channels?
My impression is that the latter is often done to reduce the number of cables, since a lot of wiring has to be installed somewhere. If the cables go through the unfinished ceiling, conflicts with ventilation planning are very likely. If they are laid on the rough floor base, there may be clashes with plumbing installations and/or it could require a more expensive screed or liquid-applied insulation. What has been your experience? Do you prefer reducing the number of cables (like described above)? Do you route them through the unfinished ceiling or on the rough floor base? How do you handle insulation when several cable ducts run parallel, especially in hallways? Less expensive insulation boards are probably ruled out then, right?
no worries, you weren’t being called a fanboy. A question for the expert regarding the star-shaped wiring layout. Suppose you have a triple socket outlet on each side of a wall. Do you run each outlet with a separate 5x2.5mm² (5x14 AWG) or 5x1.5mm² (5x16 AWG) cable, so that each socket can be switched individually? Or do you only run a single 5x2.5mm² (5x14 AWG) cable for both triple outlets combined, providing constant power plus two switchable channels?
My impression is that the latter is often done to reduce the number of cables, since a lot of wiring has to be installed somewhere. If the cables go through the unfinished ceiling, conflicts with ventilation planning are very likely. If they are laid on the rough floor base, there may be clashes with plumbing installations and/or it could require a more expensive screed or liquid-applied insulation. What has been your experience? Do you prefer reducing the number of cables (like described above)? Do you route them through the unfinished ceiling or on the rough floor base? How do you handle insulation when several cable ducts run parallel, especially in hallways? Less expensive insulation boards are probably ruled out then, right?
ruppsn schrieb:
Hi @Tom1607,
Assuming you have a triple socket on both the left and right sides of a wall, do you run each socket with a 5x2.5 or 5x1.5 cable so you can basically control each individual socket, or do you run just one 5x2.5 cable for both triple sockets combined, to have constant power plus two switchable circuits?Personally, I prefer a fully star-shaped wiring setup. Using 2.5mm² (5x2.5) cables is only necessary for lengths over about 15m (50 feet) and a 16A circuit breaker (or for higher power consumers like stoves). This depends on the breaker trip characteristics. ruppsn schrieb:
Hi @Tom1607,
My impression is that the latter option is often chosen to reduce the number of cables, since quite a few cables need to be routed and might have to be stored somewhere.That’s true, the effort is roughly the same because you have to make the channel accordingly, and cross channels are nowadays more difficult, as they are not allowed for certain bricks. It’s easier to make vertical channels, so everything is centralized. The additional cost for the cable itself isn’t that high. Then there are the terminal blocks in the distribution board and the wiring effort. But you save on cross-channeling, fiddling inside the socket box, and complex planning.
I also only use 5-core cables, and I usually wire them so that for a triple socket, each phase conductor supplies one socket, simply bridged in the distribution board. For a quadruple socket, the first two get one phase conductor each, and terminals 3 and 4 again get individual phase conductors. For a five-gang, the first two sockets get one phase, the next two another, and the fifth socket its own.
The advantage is that if you want to switch a socket later, you just rewire it in the distribution board. And you know: 1st socket black, 2nd gray, 3rd brown, basically the same for every socket.
This way, you can turn a ‘normal’ always-on socket into a switched one in five minutes without much effort. (This happens more often than you might think when it’s possible.)
ruppsn schrieb:
Hi @Tom1607,
In case of a raw ceiling, there can be conflicts with ventilation planning (very likely).In my current project (about 640sqm (6,890 sq ft) living area on two floors), there are around 200 cables in the distribution board on the ground floor. Additionally, there are 22 ventilation ducts of 70mm (2.75 inches) diameter on the ground floor. The critical area is only above the distribution board where several installations converge. If planned properly, it’s no problem. For a typical single-family house, it’s not an issue. ruppsn schrieb:
Hi @Tom1607,
If cables are laid on the raw floor slab, they can conflict with plumbing and/or require a more expensive screed or liquid insulation layer. What are your experiences? Reduce cables as described above? Run cables in the raw ceiling or on the raw floor slab? How do you handle insulation if several cable ducts run in parallel, especially in hallways? Doesn’t this rule out cheaper insulation boards?I try to avoid pipes on the raw floor slab whenever possible. Of course, it’s not always doable because planning and implementation are two different things—especially if clients are dynamic and change their minds or if a pipe is crushed during concreting so no cable can be pulled through anymore. If it becomes too much, insulation is done in two layers so everything can be accommodated without much hassle.
For really large projects (like mine at the moment), clients usually don’t want standard solutions anyway. In these cases, the floor structure is designed more robustly, so about 10cm (4 inches) of impact sound insulation can be included, which provides plenty of space.
ruppsn schrieb:
Hi @Tom1607,
How do you manage the insulation if several cable ducts run parallel, especially in hallways? Doesn’t this rule out cheaper insulation boards?As mentioned, the best approach is proper planning and integrating the cables into the ceiling structure. Another option, which can be considered during planning, is to add an extra block and drop the ceiling. With a 10cm (4 inches) drop, you can easily accommodate ventilation and electrical installations. This is the optimum solution, but the additional cost should be considered. However, if you plan to use many spotlights and LEDs, this extra effort might be justified, since you save on recessed boxes in the concrete ceiling.
Ultimately, it depends on personal preferences and priorities. If money is no object (and that does happen), then you might go for a 3m (10 ft) rough construction ceiling height, 20cm (8 inches) floor build-up, and 15cm (6 inches) lowered ceiling.
In the end, budget and personal taste decide how things are done. Visit five construction sites, and you’ll see five different solutions.