Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

ellis.codes

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 97 posts

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#21

Post by NegativeLatency »

IvyMike wrote: post #16

I've been toying with a variant of this project for my Honeywell home air filters. I have one in all my "big" rooms, and I like to keep them running at a low speed most of the day. But I also have time-of-day energy pricing, and it would be nice to automatically turn off (or at least slow) my air filters during the 5pm-8pm window. This project inspires me to at least look into the feasibility of adding that functiona…

Depending on your air filter you might be able to just use a smart plug, I went down a similar route this summer before realizing that mine would remember their power state and settings when powered off.

So now I just have them plugged into a few smart plugs with automations in homeassistant

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#23

Post by anamexis »

05 wrote: post #11
_ihaque wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on the description of the wiring to the motor (24V, GND, POT1, POT2, NC), it doesn't sound like the original setup would have been drawing much power through the pot either -- there's probably something else on the other end of that wire that is doing modulation based on the sense resistance, and the motor is itself drawing power from the 24V line. So while it's true that there should be a check for the allowab…

> there's probably something else on the other end of that wire that is doing modulation based on the sense resistance And it would have been great if that arbitrary assumption had been tested by the OP and the results were documented in the article so that they wouldn't come off as somewhat clueless as to the limitations of their design.. oh well.

From the HN guidelines:

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

> Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative.

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#24

Post by ttshaw1 »

_ihaque wrote: post #9
ttshaw1 wrote: post #6

I don't like the notion of doing speed control by putting a digipot in series with a motor. It worked because the fan happened to be low enough power but it doesn't seem like the author gave thought to the power handling capability of the digipot. If the fan happened to be beefier he's letting the smoke out with this design. Plus, this is more complicated than just doing PWM.

Based on the description of the wiring to the motor (24V, GND, POT1, POT2, NC), it doesn't sound like the original setup would have been drawing much power through the pot either -- there's probably something else on the other end of that wire that is doing modulation based on the sense resistance, and the motor is itself drawing power from the 24V line. So while it's true that there should be a check for the allowab…

You're right, I didn't read thoroughly enough.

>Everything joined up via a 2-pin and 5-pin connector on the PCB. From there, it was a straightforward matter of measuring voltages and continuity to work out what connected to what: the 2-pin connector was offering 24V DC. The 5-pin connector was what went off to the motor itself. Two of its pins were passing through the 24V DC and ground directly. Two more pins were connected to the potentiometer. The fifth pin was not connected.

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#25

Post by announcer4614 »

jonhohle wrote: post #22

This is amazingly cool. Did you consider putting a rotary encoder on the PCB to maintain local control over the speed?

That's exactly what I did :) and a convenient thing I realised afterwards is that the push-button function of the rotary encoder gives me the ability to turn the thing on and off with my foot!

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#26

Post by mihaaly »

I purchased a Phillips fan in a shopping spree. It was hot outside, needed something, did not pay much attention beyond that it worked and was not noisy.

At home my eyebrows went halfway on my forehead seeing that there is a remote and the remote is supposed to be my mobile! Need to download the app for it, connect the fan to the Wifi, but it also had bluetooth for some reason. No way Jose!

Yet, it was so incredibly stupid like 4K zoom camera in a hammer that I had to try. Carefully. Data collection notice in the app shop is not promising, not at all. Location data, ID, I do not remember in full but perhaps contacts too? Unsure, but a lot. Anyway, will not enable access to most, airplane mode on, no bluetooth device in sight, so went ahead and installed the app, router disconnected from the internet, then run it.

First thing: refusing access to location. App: sorry, you cannot use me if I cannot access your location, network, and my mothership. And it stops. Big laugh, delete the whole thing. Leaving feedback for other customers about this incredibly stupid intrusion.

Then I got answer from Phillips! Something along the line: "This is for the best interest of our customers, we need your precise location so we can share personalized pollen and climate data and whatnot, we absolutely must insist this!"

For a fan!

Meanwhile the fan has physical buttons on it, can adjust speed, timer, and the cycle. Not completely useless. However some buttons need two press to register the action once. Beeps twice, does thing once. Likely some interference with The App, need to make sure that I am in the same room with the fan with a warning press and then the real press, or whothef knows what was in the head of these guys when they put this piece of thing together!? But really, are they nuts? Ruining use along pollen data?!

Are we already living the movie Idiocracy when it is about the Phillips product design department?! Did they loose all sense with reality? I am sure they already pushing through some new AI function for this very fan and are sad that mine cannot connect to the mother ship through satellite or something just so the update can be pushed to it learning my breath patterns for optimal fan speed. They are nuts! They are nuts!

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#27

Post by reaperducer »

NegativeLatency wrote: post #21
IvyMike wrote: post #16

I've been toying with a variant of this project for my Honeywell home air filters. I have one in all my "big" rooms, and I like to keep them running at a low speed most of the day. But I also have time-of-day energy pricing, and it would be nice to automatically turn off (or at least slow) my air filters during the 5pm-8pm window. This project inspires me to at least look into the feasibility of adding that functiona…

Depending on your air filter you might be able to just use a smart plug, I went down a similar route this summer before realizing that mine would remember their power state and settings when powered off. So now I just have them plugged into a few smart plugs with automations in homeassistant

Why not just use a dumb timer plug from a hardware store?

Ten bucks, and completely hacker-proof: https://www.acehardware.com/departments/lighting-and-electri...

$16 if you need a remote control: https://www.acehardware.com/departments/lighting-and-electri...

Or $17 if you want to get all digital and fancy: https://www.acehardware.com/p/3001323

Re: My fan worked fine, so I gave it WiFi

#30

Post by [deleted] »

ttshaw1 wrote: post #6

I don't like the notion of doing speed control by putting a digipot in series with a motor. It worked because the fan happened to be low enough power but it doesn't seem like the author gave thought to the power handling capability of the digipot. If the fan happened to be beefier he's letting the smoke out with this design. Plus, this is more complicated than just doing PWM.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN