Skip navigation
Proposal image

OpenControl Building by Group OpenControl

8comments
Share conversation: Share via:

Wyatt Sanders

Jun 21, 2015
04:23

Member


1 |
Share via:
Considering that your proposal was written and submitted at the last minute, I am not surprised that it's lacking.

Wyatt Sanders

Jun 21, 2015
04:53

Member


2 |
Share via:
Do you have any prototypes of the things that you are mentioning in your proposal? You mention arduinos, though arduinos are not at all intended for integration into a building. They do not have the necessary UL, CSA or equivalent tests to verify that they will not catch fire. You cannot simply connect an arduino to some relays to control a home. How is your proposal any better than say a $15 occupancy sensor, or a nest learning thermostat? I believe there are other technologies that are already on the market that accomplish your goals "We are proposing that building owners (both residential and commercial) interface with an open source platform, to control smart devices and traditional devices with smart plugs to operate their buildings to meet a desired energy profile." Existing open source home automation systems already include Nest, Smartthings, and more, they all have frameworks that people can already integrate with. https://developer.nest.com/ http://www.smartthings.com/developers/

Celis Brisbin

Jun 22, 2015
11:49

Member


3 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Wyatt, Thank you for your messages. The concept is to have a singular open-source interface for all smart devices in a building. Our goal is to create an open-source platform which can be developed for different applications including net-zero and TOU environments. Our concept is to create the logic which will be compatible with UL compliant devices and connect them to our unique open-source platform. Our development team has created a prototype logic and also is researching softwares and devices, including Arduino. Seeing the success of SmartThings and Nest only compliments our concept as we are building off of these offerings to make a superior platform for the user and accelerating the development and uptake by presenting it as open-source. Specific to our concept is creating an community online, allowing users to share their consumption logics to others online and in their geography and suggesting how to improve. We hope that our users will see their savings in both cost and environmental impact. We are also especially excited to use our logic to promote solar economics where the net metering credit is less than common rates. We hope that our concept will help products like yours be more cost effective and be integrated in high performance buildings. One of our logic prototypes has a building's consumption curve following the solar production curve to use all electrons on site rather than subjecting them to grid or storage losses. Thank you for your enthusiasm for our concept. All the best, Celis

Wyatt Sanders

Jun 23, 2015
02:08

Member


4 |
Share via:
Celis, Please don't mistake my criticism for enthusiasm of your proposal. You can explore using an arduino all you want to, but you will not be allowed to sell that on the US market without NRTL approval like UL, CSA, etc. Arduino's are for hobbyists, not for consumer products. SmartThings and Nest also do not validate your concept, they actually oppose it. Those are your competition along with many other home automation systems that you are competing against. Your idea is not novel. There are existing frameworks, and platforms that you could use to accomplish the same thing to greater success instead of bootstrapping something like this. "We are also especially excited to use our logic to promote solar economics where the net metering credit is less than common rates. We hope that our concept will help products like yours be more cost effective and be integrated in high performance buildings." How is adding the cost of your home automation system to our product going to make our product more cost effective? This logically doesn't make any sense. The only way you could make our product more cost effective would be further reducing the cost, or increasing the performance. You would be adding to the cost of a system, and I have some serious doubts that your products would be cost effective against existing home automation products like timers and occupancy sensors, and smart thermostats. "One of our logic prototypes has a building's consumption curve following the solar production curve to use all electrons on site rather than subjecting them to grid or storage losses." I really don't follow this statement at all. The grid is 93% efficient over long distances. Energy produced on site and distributed locally within the home is around 99% efficient. There's inefficiencies but they're pretty much insignificant. Solar energy production already follows peak building usage, air-conditioning energy is used at the same time solar energy is produced, so again I don't see why what's in your proposal is necessary. This contest is ultimately about mitigating carbon and greenhouse gas emissions. For you to be able to do that you need to develop a whole array of products and sensors (that already exist from other vendors like SmartThings) that would be able to control and recognize all the devices in a building, and load shed them when they aren't needed. It's hard to really figure all that out without user input which makes it cumbersome, and if it turns off things people actually want running like A/C then it's going to be a nuisance, people aren't going to recommend it, and it's not going to hit the mass market. Again though I will say there already exist cost effective products for load shedding that are already on the mass market. Wyatt

Celis Brisbin

Jun 23, 2015
09:46

Member


5 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Wyatt, I am glad to see our closest competitor taking such a keen interest in the proposal. I look forward to re-reading your post carefully to see where I can find some constructive criticism. I will be sure to address these topics and more in the final proposal, if selected. Best, Celis

Francisco Silva

Jun 24, 2015
12:30

Member


6 |
Share via:
Celis, I find your proposal compelling because it addresses the main obstacle for truly large-scale adoption of energy-saving smart devices in commercial and residential buildings. An independent, integrating solution that bridges the existing gaps between devices from competing manufacturers seems to me is what is lacking for this large-scale adoption to take off. The consumer will be able to embrace these devices and strategies without concern about choosing the "loosing" brand, fear of short-term obsolescence, or worry about unwanted constraints from the manufacturers. The resulting large-scale adoption of these devices, operating through an open platform like the one described in your proposal, should create synergies not yet envisioned and help in ways not yet predicted. Good luck with your proposal. I look forward to witnessing its implementation in the marketplace in the not too distant future.

Chad Knutsen

Jul 9, 2015
01:55

Member


7 |
Share via:
Fantastic idea. I would certainly like to include a system like the one you describe into my 3D Printed Hempcretenhome project. Have you considered creating your own, residential/commercial construction approveable circuits etc,mot avoid the ole arduino bursting into flame problems?...well I guess Hempcretenhome is almost entirely flame resistant it might not matter if integrated into a hempcrete home haha. But for every other building it may matter quite a bit. The main trick would be in the wires used, and the method of distributing the heat generated.

Chad Knutsen

Sep 13, 2015
12:42

Member


8 |
Share via:

Close race in the end mates. Thanks again for your project, I still definitely hope we can collaborate as we both move onward and upward! The ideas you present could undoubtedly play a significant role in mitigating the emissions from the buildings sector. Hopefully, the hempcrete buildings sector!

Cheers,

Chad K.