I've been looking into this system integration/automation stuff. Big question I have is - how much is a temperature sensor worth to you?
Something like - Arduino Parts & Kits Online Melbourne, Buy Microcontroller Boards, Arduino Electronic Components - TEMP: Temperature Sensor Module - looks pretty easy to use and mount to heatsink in each amplifier. But could get expensive if we're monitoring a bunch of them! The sensor itself is ~$5ea alone. There is a cheaper alternative - Digital Temperature Sensor Breakout - TMP102 - SparkFun Electronics but I can't visualise a neat way of thermally coupling it to a a heatsink.
At least initially I think I'd like to focus on: power sequencing, monitoring, shutdown temps and high temp warning. DAC control is very application specific and may follow later.
I'm away for next 3 or 4 days but when I get back I'll do up a prototype and test it out.
Something like - Arduino Parts & Kits Online Melbourne, Buy Microcontroller Boards, Arduino Electronic Components - TEMP: Temperature Sensor Module - looks pretty easy to use and mount to heatsink in each amplifier. But could get expensive if we're monitoring a bunch of them! The sensor itself is ~$5ea alone. There is a cheaper alternative - Digital Temperature Sensor Breakout - TMP102 - SparkFun Electronics but I can't visualise a neat way of thermally coupling it to a a heatsink.
At least initially I think I'd like to focus on: power sequencing, monitoring, shutdown temps and high temp warning. DAC control is very application specific and may follow later.
I'm away for next 3 or 4 days but when I get back I'll do up a prototype and test it out.
wouldnt something like SEKISUI thermal adhesive tape be workable for mounting the sensor? once the impedance of the tape is taken into account i would think it would be perfectly reliable. i expect given the density of the device mounting on this sink that somewhere near the center just one would be fine. the amp wont be putting out a crapload of heat, so some might say its not worth it, but i wouldnt think one of the buffers going bye bye would be much fun in this amp. here in OZ we cope with some pretty serious heat and heat will also be a sign of other problems, so i think its worth it. can you define monitoring for the purpose of the above paragraph?
wifi control is a nice idea, dac volume is pretty important to me really, since its the only volume i have in my system, i can do it either by logging into my dac by wifi with the ipad, or the same with volume control in puremusic (as well as the individual hardware controls), but i'd rather not have to have several apps to do the one thing; particularly since unless they are web based as you mention, multitasking on the ipad v1 is a bit of a pita.
you are right it is application specific, but i wouldnt be surprised if it would be useful to a number of people in this thread and those that crossover to the big brother wire poweramp to have a central unit that can also access their sources volume.
wifi control is a nice idea, dac volume is pretty important to me really, since its the only volume i have in my system, i can do it either by logging into my dac by wifi with the ipad, or the same with volume control in puremusic (as well as the individual hardware controls), but i'd rather not have to have several apps to do the one thing; particularly since unless they are web based as you mention, multitasking on the ipad v1 is a bit of a pita.
you are right it is application specific, but i wouldnt be surprised if it would be useful to a number of people in this thread and those that crossover to the big brother wire poweramp to have a central unit that can also access their sources volume.
Last edited:
By monitoring I just meant to have the temps observed by the arduino and at a set level give a visual warning then at another threshold switch the corresponding power relay off.
Could also make the temp accessible/logged for a period if necessary but I'm guessing we won't be able to fit all temps and outputs on a single front panel display in some meaningful manner that doesn't look like .....
EDIT: I want to do volume control and web access but was just trying to set an easier goal initially and add to it with time. Next week I'll have an ethernet connection and a temp sensor to play with so can try some ideas out
For dac control, I'd rather not be trying to provide options that cover every nuiance of every dac (focus on vol control only perhaps to start with) since I'll potentially end up targeting both wolfson and sabre dacs I don't want trying to implement both of those to hold up the core feature of power sequencing to start with.
Could also make the temp accessible/logged for a period if necessary but I'm guessing we won't be able to fit all temps and outputs on a single front panel display in some meaningful manner that doesn't look like .....
EDIT: I want to do volume control and web access but was just trying to set an easier goal initially and add to it with time. Next week I'll have an ethernet connection and a temp sensor to play with so can try some ideas out
For dac control, I'd rather not be trying to provide options that cover every nuiance of every dac (focus on vol control only perhaps to start with) since I'll potentially end up targeting both wolfson and sabre dacs I don't want trying to implement both of those to hold up the core feature of power sequencing to start with.
Last edited:
nah i think it should only show on the panel perhaps unless called or if there is a problem. as in your first option above, logging could be something initiated and recorded on a nearby computer could it not? it might be a nice feature to check during each season, particularly if we discover the amp sounds nicer when warm, so the optimal running temp might be seasonal hehe
or, with the 2 sensors (one per channel, i dont think we need more, unless you want one on the regs?) could the arduino calculate a mean and display it for the whole system?
or, with the 2 sensors (one per channel, i dont think we need more, unless you want one on the regs?) could the arduino calculate a mean and display it for the whole system?
Calcs won't be a problem, mean temp in 2 or more different enclosures might not be particularly useful though. I was thinking of putting temp sensors on every amp in my system so I'll be up for at least 4 or maybe 6 temps being recorded in my system.
Logging to a computer would be my plan for sure, a basic web UI on the arduino and could actually have the data store serving some more fancy web UI.
I have always wanted an excuse to play with couchDB, its a restful nosql database that has integrated HTTP server, so you query the database through http and you can store webpages as objects as well as data!
Logging to a computer would be my plan for sure, a basic web UI on the arduino and could actually have the data store serving some more fancy web UI.
I have always wanted an excuse to play with couchDB, its a restful nosql database that has integrated HTTP server, so you query the database through http and you can store webpages as objects as well as data!
EDIT: I want to do volume control and web access but was just trying to set an easier goal initially and add to it with time. Next week I'll have an ethernet connection and a temp sensor to play with so can try some ideas out
yeah cool, well volume (on 2 different i2c addresses) and input switching are the main ones for me, filter settings and clocking stuff will definitely be of interest as switching from the listening position is definitely the best way to pick up differences. It sounds like this functionality can be added with a simple software and perhaps web/widget update anyway as long as the hardware controls are fairly universal.
see above, but generally i'm in agreement, if the hardware is ready for the updates via software the additions can be even added by the user too i would think? so yeah as long as a new board doesnt have to be spun each time its all good, is the dip flash the only way to update these things, or can software/firmware be modified over the network?
why wouldnt mean temp of the 2 identical amps not be useful? could even just be displayed as a dot that changes colour as it gets hotter and only changes to a number if there is a problem detected. as both amps will be basically the same and will be in the same environment, with a pretty similar signal being processed, i would think at a glance it would be a pretty useful object. no more than the mean of each L/R pair of each HF/MF/LF would be useful of course.
this is only for the purposes of display realestate and ease of deciphering it; each amp would still have 1 or 2 sensors
anyway we should probably leave it till you have a bit of info to report, the convo can be shifted to email
this is only for the purposes of display realestate and ease of deciphering it; each amp would still have 1 or 2 sensors
anyway we should probably leave it till you have a bit of info to report, the convo can be shifted to email
Last edited:
Agreed it'd be fun to play the dac settings and that having instant switching at listening position is the only way to judge the impact. For now I'm just trying to keep the UI neat and usable and get the basics right and add the rest with time. There really shouldn't be any hardware changes needed if we don't make any stupid mistakes. Anything I write I'll probably have sourcecode available for all willing/interested.
My volume control is actually denon reciever for the foreseeable future so I will be interfacing to that as well via its network control interface.
My problem with averaging temps would be that you are going to take longer to recognise a catastrophic failure since you're dividing the deltaT on one amp (assuming only one amp has a concurrent component failure) by the number of sensors you're averaging. Perhaps if like you say you're just wanting to observe change in system performance at different operating temps then there would be some value in that.
EDIT: yeah email could be easier, unless anyone wants this discussion filling the thread? Is anyone else interested in the DAC control stuff or happy with other existing solutions?
My volume control is actually denon reciever for the foreseeable future so I will be interfacing to that as well via its network control interface.
My problem with averaging temps would be that you are going to take longer to recognise a catastrophic failure since you're dividing the deltaT on one amp (assuming only one amp has a concurrent component failure) by the number of sensors you're averaging. Perhaps if like you say you're just wanting to observe change in system performance at different operating temps then there would be some value in that.
EDIT: yeah email could be easier, unless anyone wants this discussion filling the thread? Is anyone else interested in the DAC control stuff or happy with other existing solutions?
Last edited:
but wont the power switching be concurrent? i dont see the problem. as i said this is only for the purposes of simplified display of the readings to save space, nothing at all to do with the control logic for shutdown/overtemp. Temp would still be sensed and acted on, on an individual basis, which we would bloody hope will be quicker and more reliable than needing a person there watching the temp, that would make the whole thing a bit redundant would it not?. as soon as one sensor becomes quite elevated it could switch to that single amp's temperature.
what are you going to do, sit there watching your amps temp in case it gets hot; then leap screaming NOOOOO Homer style to yank the power out? =P seems kinda against the theme we are going for here =D until theres a problem its just pretty lights isnt it?
what are you going to do, sit there watching your amps temp in case it gets hot; then leap screaming NOOOOO Homer style to yank the power out? =P seems kinda against the theme we are going for here =D until theres a problem its just pretty lights isnt it?
Last edited:
I'll chime in here for a second (gasp!~).
I think the idea of a slick total system control is great (modulo the fact I have no need or want for it at all).
However having a single controller doing everything for lots of unique devices is perhaps not the best way to go about it, especially if you want others to get in on it.
Your perfect solution will most likely differ dramatically to another's.
A better idea is to have a local controller for each unit in your chain.
This local device deals with all of the specifics of that unit: power up / power down, temp monitoring, bias monitoring, volume controls (in the case of a dac), etc.
The components required (tiny pcb, pic uC, sensors, etc) for these local modules are worth a couple of dollars.
Then have a single central controller box which interfaces with these local sub-modules.
Thus this "mother-ship" sends and receives a unified language of commands and notification / emergency interrupts.
This method of obscuring local idiosyncrasies from the central controller has the advantage of making the system easier to adapt for the end user and a lot more flexible.
I feel that updating and expanding the mother-ship code / language base would also be simpler than dealing with some one-size-fits-all veritable fruit basket of code...
This is all IMO of course.
I think the idea of a slick total system control is great (modulo the fact I have no need or want for it at all).
However having a single controller doing everything for lots of unique devices is perhaps not the best way to go about it, especially if you want others to get in on it.
Your perfect solution will most likely differ dramatically to another's.
A better idea is to have a local controller for each unit in your chain.
This local device deals with all of the specifics of that unit: power up / power down, temp monitoring, bias monitoring, volume controls (in the case of a dac), etc.
The components required (tiny pcb, pic uC, sensors, etc) for these local modules are worth a couple of dollars.
Then have a single central controller box which interfaces with these local sub-modules.
Thus this "mother-ship" sends and receives a unified language of commands and notification / emergency interrupts.
This method of obscuring local idiosyncrasies from the central controller has the advantage of making the system easier to adapt for the end user and a lot more flexible.
I feel that updating and expanding the mother-ship code / language base would also be simpler than dealing with some one-size-fits-all veritable fruit basket of code...
This is all IMO of course.
Last edited:
That was part of my plan wolfsin.
I like nattonrice's suggestion's. What is people's feelings on say using a 2.4GHz module (say one of the xbee modules) for these sub-modules and make that interface from sub-module to mothership wireless. An xbee can do ADC and a few points of digital i/o which is all we're talking about for everything except the DAC controller. I haven't got time at the moment to check if it can source enough current to switch an SSR without any extra devices.
I am prepared to be flamed down for this suggestion just putting it out there because it could be neat.
I like nattonrice's suggestion's. What is people's feelings on say using a 2.4GHz module (say one of the xbee modules) for these sub-modules and make that interface from sub-module to mothership wireless. An xbee can do ADC and a few points of digital i/o which is all we're talking about for everything except the DAC controller. I haven't got time at the moment to check if it can source enough current to switch an SSR without any extra devices.
I am prepared to be flamed down for this suggestion just putting it out there because it could be neat.
Last edited:
Not worried that such a high frequency could cause interference?
Just a thought
Ciao!
Do
It izWolfsin's life expectancy that is causing the interference here in Colorado. This izLooking more like a moonshot solution by the post. Personally I love the wi-fi part and Sparkfun izOnly an hour away but unless you guyzR all going to give up your day jobs . . .
IMO the hardest part of it all is getting the UI right on the mother app else 'twillB one 'mother' of an app. In my case it will be WMP but, merely by suggesting that, I expect the earth's axis to be altered by the reaction :-(
Hi Guys,
Just a heads-up that every one of these boards has shipped out as of yesterday!
Most went out via lettermail, anything international went via air lettermail, and both HYPERTUNE and qusp's (and hochopeper) went out via small packet air as they also contained thier other kits and parts.
Cheers,
Owen
Just a heads-up that every one of these boards has shipped out as of yesterday!
Most went out via lettermail, anything international went via air lettermail, and both HYPERTUNE and qusp's (and hochopeper) went out via small packet air as they also contained thier other kits and parts.
Cheers,
Owen
nope, i dont know about where you live, but my house is already filled with such frequencies and any good modern design should take this into account, so as long as good layout technique is used its really no problem. it would have to be radiated too, because i see no reason these circuits have to be connected electrically except for an eventual common ground point, hell something like this if you wanted to get pedantic you could easily power with batteries.
great to hear opc!!
btw guys i've updated the GB thread with some rough pricing on passives and some discourse regarding the transformer, which will not be available in the numbers we need from digikey till June. i've emailed Richard at sumR for a quote with group pricing.
so lets get moving on this hey!!
Sorry for highjacking this thread even if i'm not a part of the LPUHP GB.
The SSRs look nice, i like the possibility of switching off during zero-crossing. But why the high price?
Do they have any other advantages over relays and what are the downsides of the cheap SSR versions (with same power capabilities of course)?
Finally i would like to hear about the controller, i have a similar dream for my system but that is a bit to far away. I was thinking of playing a little with some of atmels ATMEGA series. Have a few cute ATtiny13 (SOIC8 package), but the pins run out fast...
My plan is currently to keep everything local in the amp but have a serial input or something left for debug and future features.
The SSRs look nice, i like the possibility of switching off during zero-crossing. But why the high price?
Do they have any other advantages over relays and what are the downsides of the cheap SSR versions (with same power capabilities of course)?
Finally i would like to hear about the controller, i have a similar dream for my system but that is a bit to far away. I was thinking of playing a little with some of atmels ATMEGA series. Have a few cute ATtiny13 (SOIC8 package), but the pins run out fast...
My plan is currently to keep everything local in the amp but have a serial input or something left for debug and future features.