interlocking switch

[Adrian116]

Well you could duplicate the circuit I drew 3 times. 1 for Clean room, 1 for Do not wake my sleepy self, and lastly 1 for switch cleared, but that sounds messy I think. I am tired, and think I am going to sleep in a bit, but I can look into tomorrow when I am more awake.

Thank you very much~

 

[Mikebits]

Your welcome. I really am going to sleep now, but just wanted to ask. What part of China are you from? I spent 3 months in Tianjin and I loved that place so much, you have a wonderful country, and I loved the people there. I wish I could move there

 

[Adrian116]

Your welcome. I really am going to sleep now, but just wanted to ask. What part of China are you from? I spent 3 months in Tianjin and I loved that place so much, you have a wonderful country, and I loved the people there. I wish I could move there

Really? Tianjin is near beijing~ I am from Macau SAR, do you know that? The place with many casino......or near Hong Kong~ It is a very small city.

 

[KMoffett]

Adrian116,

I just got into this thread, am a little confused. In the room, is a toggle switch with two positions. The goal is: moving the switch from one position to the other pulses an R/C transmitter that toggles a relay at the remote receiver, indicating the status change. Are the status indicating LEDs at the toggle switch or at the receiver, or both? If at the toggle switch, could they be eliminated and depend on the switch's physical position to locally indicate the room status? How soon after the toggle switch is changed does the remote relay have to indicate the change? Would a one or more minute delay be a problem? I'm thinking of a small microcontroller with a sleep mode (very low power drain), that wakes up periodically, checks the switch position, and transmits a signal if a change had occurred.

Ken

 

[Torben]

Oh, and Torben, I did not mean to jump in on your convo, Just thought I would add my 2 cents. Don't stop your suggestions based on my interruption

hehe..no worries, Mike! It's a public forum and nobody owns a thread. Besides, my brain had shut down for the night and I had to hit the sack anyway.


Cheers,

Torben

 

[Mikebits]

Ok here is a circuit of what I was thinking. Not as fancy as a MCU but it is minimal parts and easy to build. I ran it on a simulator just to make sure it works. It did, but you may need to play with the cap value to get your on time just right. Once the cap is charged the circuit draws little current which is nice. I would recommend you make a little breadboard circuit before you go into mass production

 

[Adrian116]

Adrian116,

I just got into this thread, am a little confused. In the room, is a toggle switch with two positions. The goal is: moving the switch from one position to the other pulses an R/C transmitter that toggles a relay at the remote receiver, indicating the status change. Are the status indicating LEDs at the toggle switch or at the receiver, or both? If at the toggle switch, could they be eliminated and depend on the switch's physical position to locally indicate the room status? How soon after the toggle switch is changed does the remote relay have to indicate the change? Would a one or more minute delay be a problem? I'm thinking of a small microcontroller with a sleep mode (very low power drain), that wakes up periodically, checks the switch position, and transmits a signal if a change had occurred.

Ken

Yes, the toggle switch is with two positions. A three position can aslo be used if necessary.

Moving the toggle switch will toggle the relay to give a short pulse for activating the remote control side only.

It's better to show the status in both side.

Actually the remote relay need to indicate the change immediately.So it can't not be delay for one minute.

Thank you~

 

[Adrian116]

Ok here is a circuit of what I was thinking. Not as fancy as a MCU but it is minimal parts and easy to build. I ran it on a simulator just to make sure it works. It did, but you may need to play with the cap value to get your on time just right. Once the cap is charged the circuit draws little current which is nice. I would recommend you make a little breadboard circuit before you go into mass production

You make the same think with me

but i don't know why the relay doesn't toggle when i turn the switch,

could you tell me how does it work?

 

[Mikebits]

Here is what I think you want. Person flips the switch, relay closes for a short moment remote sends alarm, then relay re-opens. Now if the switch is put back in the middle, you want to be notified that this occurred, so again when switch goes to middle the relay activates for a moment then deactivates triggering your remote. As I am speaking I now see a flaw in this plan. What happens if someone flips the switch into the wrong position, then puts it into the right position, your alarm panel would give multiple alarms.

But for basic circuit operation of what I have shown here is what happens:

At initial standing state, relays are off. When a switch is moved there is a momentary rush of current through the relay and it activates. After a short time the capacitor charges up to the battery voltage minus drop across relay. Once cap is charged, the potential across the relay is insufficient to maintain relay activation and therefore it goes back to the off state. So what your relay should do is something like a short pulse _____-----_____. In theory anyways. The on time needs to be long enough for your remote to recognize the pulse.

The more I think about it, the more I think my circuit is too crude, perhaps an MCU might be what you need to prevent false alarms and give the circuit a little brains. But then your cost will go up which might matter depending on amount of rooms.

Would it not just be easier to have the customer use a do not disturb sign or flip it over to clean?

Sorry, guess I was not much help

 

[Adrian116]

Here is what I think you want. Person flips the switch, relay closes for a short moment remote sends alarm, then relay re-opens. Now if the switch is put back in the middle, you want to be notified that this occurred, so again when switch goes to middle the relay activates for a moment then deactivates triggering your remote. As I am speaking I now see a flaw in this plan. What happens if someone flips the switch into the wrong position, then puts it into the right position, your alarm panel would give multiple alarms.

But for basic circuit operation of what I have shown here is what happens:

At initial standing state, relays are off. When a switch is moved there is a momentary rush of current through the relay and it activates. After a short time the capacitor charges up to the battery voltage minus drop across relay. Once cap is charged, the potential across the relay is insufficient to maintain relay activation and therefore it goes back to the off state. So what your relay should do is something like a short pulse _____-----_____. In theory anyways. The on time needs to be long enough for your remote to recognize the pulse.

The more I think about it, the more I think my circuit is too crude, perhaps an MCU might be what you need to prevent false alarms and give the circuit a little brains. But then your cost will go up which might matter depending on amount of rooms.

Would it not just be easier to have the customer use a do not disturb sign or flip it over to clean?

Sorry, guess I was not much help

It is my pleasure to have your help,

you help me so much already.

May be the problem can't be solve in such way~

I will think about it~THANK YOU

 

[john1]

If i had to write this for a chinese forum,
i would get the assistance of someone who could write Chinese.

I would be unlikely to be able to read it myself.
I wouldnt know if it made sense or not.

One of the things that are curious, is the interlocking arrangements of the switches.

As Mikebits has said,
couldn't the customer have a "do not disturb" sign, and flip it over for "clean" ?

Well, the customer could, if the card were regularly checked by the cleaners.
But this arrangement (i guess) is supposed to operate a radio sender, to inform the staff.

But Mikebits raises a good point,
namely that a card has only two sides,
so why have two switches with interlocks ...?

Maybe the original poster doesnt want two switches,
he wants to use switches with two positions, " ON - OFF - ON "
and maybe this got lost in the translation.

Why have two switches with interlocks ?
I think he only needs one switch per box.

If i am wrong, i assume he will soon say so.

*****************************

So, one switch ... yes ?

maybe.

*****************************

It's better to show the status in both side.

.............................

I am going to assume that this means an LED on each side, one for "Please Clean"
and the other for "Please do not disturb"

.............................

What else could it mean ?
Well it could mean that the status should be shown at the customers box,
and also at the cleaners room.

Yes, i think thats it.
Again, not obvious, but better than i could put it using Mandarin.

****************************

Initially i was thinking of one relay, but now i think two might be needed.
Also, the battery conservation ... Mikebits, that arrangement uses current all the time.

An arrangement where a cap charges, then stops taking current would only use leakage.
Such an arrangement could switch the already charged cap, to one of two relays.
The relay would only close for a short interval, but enough to send the info to
the staff.

As to the LED current, i think that could be minimised.
A small LED might light adequately on maybe 2000 ohms. Maybe even a higher resistance.
If the staff return the box to "OFF" then the battery might last a month or more.

I dunno that the box needs to send any signal for "OFF"

****************************

One more question, will the remote sender be using the same battery as the LEDs and relay(s) ?
Of course it will.
And will the remote sender have to send different signals for "CLEAN" or "OFF" or "DONT DISTURB"
No, only for "CLEAN" or "DONT DISTURB"

This has been re-written a few times.
I know it is untidy.

Cheers, John

 

[Torben]

Hi John!

I have these same questions. Why two switches and not one switch with three positions?

Another question I have: why relays? Could not transistors be used and thereby save a lot of current?

If I understand the requirements correctly, they are:

• There is a switch in the room which the customer can set to "Please clean", "Clear", or "Do not disturb".
• Any time the switch is moved to "Please clean" or "Do not disturb", the corresponding LED is lit and the corresponding button on the remote control should be activated. There will be duplicate LEDs on both sides of the door, so that both the customer and the cleaners can see them.
• Any time the switch is moved to "Clear", any lit LEDs must be turned off and another button on the remote control will be activated.

Adrian, is this correct?


Torben

 

[Adrian116]

If i had to write this for a chinese forum,
i would get the assistance of someone who could write Chinese.

I would be unlikely to be able to read it myself.
I wouldnt know if it made sense or not.

One of the things that are curious, is the interlocking arrangements of the switches.

As Mikebits has said,
couldn't the customer have a "do not disturb" sign, and flip it over for "clean" ?

Well, the customer could, if the card were regularly checked by the cleaners.
But this arrangement (i guess) is supposed to operate a radio sender, to inform the staff.

But Mikebits raises a good point,
namely that a card has only two sides,
so why have two switches with interlocks ...?

..........QUOTE]


Actually, it is ok to use a three ways toggle switch ("ON"-"OFF"-"ON")~
If such kind of switch is used, there is no need to make a interlocking switch.

but the difficulty is that there are only 6 pins on the switch (may be there is such switch with more pins). I don't know if each status have a pair of pins.
How to make a short pulse to activate the relay each time you turn the switch.

May be it's better to tell the actual condition.
PS: the original remote control set is control like that: Each time you press the button. The status of the reciever will hold and return to original status when you press the button on the remote control again.

Assume there is only one 3 ways toggle switch.

1. I am the customer now. I am having the bath and do not want any disturb. So i turn to do not disturb. then the LED on the control box and reciever lit up.

2. After i finished the bath. I turn the switch to middle, then the LED on both side will off.

In this procedure. How do you activate the relay for both actions? This is the difficulty.

The original remote control will use it's own battery which can last for over one month. The box will use another battery. Of course both of them can use the same battery.

Thank you for your suggestion

 

[Adrian116]

Hi John!

I have these same questions. Why two switches and not one switch with three positions?

Another question I have: why relays? Could not transistors be used and thereby save a lot of current?

If I understand the requirements correctly, they are:

• There is a switch in the room which the customer can set to "Please clean", "Clear", or "Do not disturb".
• Any time the switch is moved to "Please clean" or "Do not disturb", the corresponding LED is lit and the corresponding button on the remote control should be activated. There will be duplicate LEDs on both sides of the door, so that both the customer and the cleaners can see them.
• Any time the switch is moved to "Clear", any lit LEDs must be turned off and another button on the remote control will be activated.

Adrian, is this correct?


Torben

Yes , you are right.
But one thing should be reminded that the relay to activate the remote control must be a pulse for a second. Can't hold the activate status.

 

[Torben]

Yes , you are right.
But one thing should be reminded that the relay to activate the remote control must be a pulse for a second. Can't hold the activate status.

That's fine. Do you know the make and model of the actual remote controller you are using?


Torben

 

[Adrian116]

That's fine. Do you know the make and model of the actual remote controller you are using?


Torben

Sorry, i don't have since nothing is written on it ><

But i think the button on it is used to give a pulse to make it "on" and make it "off" by pressing the button again. The button should not be hold.

What info. about the remote control you want? I will try my best to tell you

 

[Torben]

Sorry, i don't have since nothing is written on it ><

But i think the button on it is used to give a pulse to make it "on" and make it "off" by pressing the button again. The button should not be hold.

What info. about the remote control you want? I will try my best to tell you

I suspect that the button works by either pulling a line high or low--I was hoping to figure out which. Then again, I'm not sure that it matters.

I will think about this some more over the next couple of hours and see what I can come up with.


Torben

 

[Mikebits]

I admit, my circuit was somewhat crude as I stated earlier, but without knowing Adrian's background in circuits I attempted to keep it real simple, but I was not happy with it.

But Adrian rest assured, now that Torben is on the case you will have a solution. This guy sometimes goes as far as to build a prototype to make sure something works before he gives the circuit to ya. Your in good hands. Oh Adrian, dont forget to watch the eclipse over there in China on Friday

 

[Torben]

I admit, my circuit was somewhat crude as I stated earlier, but without knowing Adrian's background in circuits I attempted to keep it real simple, but I was not happy with it.

Well, it's also hard to know how to approach it without being sure about the remote control itself. I like simple solutions like yours. The devil of it is that there's often that one requirement which makes the simple solution impractical. :/

I'm taking a swing at the problem but that's no guarantee of anything. Any help you can give me will be much appreciated! Your circuit is giving me ideas too.

But Adrian rest assured, now that Torben is on the case you will have a solution. This guy sometimes goes as far as to build a prototype to make sure something works before he gives the circuit to ya. Your in good hands.

Thanks for the kind words, but I do this as much for my own education as for anything else. There are guys on this board who could just look at the problem and scratch a complete solution out on a napkin for you. I love the chance to try to solve problems and a forum like this is a perfect place to get to try without having to charge money for something I feel I'm not qualified to charge money for.

Oh Adrian, dont forget to watch the eclipse over there in China on Friday

An eclipse? Solar or lunar? I'd love a good solar eclipse. Lunars are cool too but I haven't stood in a good solar eclipse since I was too young to understand what was happening. Either way I wish I could be in China on Friday to see it (and I've always wanted to go to China).


Torben

 

[Mikebits]

An eclipse? Solar or lunar? I'd love a good solar eclipse. Lunars are cool too but I haven't stood in a good solar eclipse since I was too young to understand what was happening. Either way I wish I could be in China on Friday to see it (and I've always wanted to go to China).

China is really nice. The geology there is spectacular. I was fortunate to go on the Great Wall. Magnificent.
Anyways the Eclipse is solar, suppose to occur at 7:08 a.m. to 7:10 a.m. ET.