@zxdavb Iāll give it a go just as soon as Iāve either
a) Moved my HGI80 interface onto the HA Server
b) Figured out how to send the HGI serial info over the network to the HA server
Current use, mainly tinkering with MQTT, used it originally with Domoticz when the system first went in to get an idea of what it was actually doing.
Serial over the network would be great, means that a PiZero with the HGI80 could be located for optimal reception eg where the current evohome controller is.
Note: Zone temperatures (Ā°C) / heat demand (%) are not on these graphs, only Device temperatures / demand.
You need to know:
FC is the central heating (i.e. what evohome is asking the central heating to do, once itās considered what the devices are saying to it)
04 is a TRV
34 is a round thermostat
Demand is roughly the % time that a device thinks it should be provided with heat (you can think of how far the current temp is from the setpoint).
FC demand (you see the equivalent of this in the evohome controllerās UI) is the max of all the zone demand (you see the equivalent of this in the controllerās UI), which themselves is the max of all the device demand for devices in that zone.
I believe a zoneās temp is the average of the temps of all devices in that zone, so will be skewed by the TRVs - which are sitting on top of hot water pipes.
Awesome to see this become a reality! I am busy fixing some things that broke during a migration to new hardware, but when I get that sorted and the work travel settles down, Iām going to make the plunge.
Quick question, how does this interoperate with the existing Evohome system? ie
-Can I run this alongside the existing evohome integration?
-If I set thermostats with this, will it have any negative effect on the normal evohome controller, or will it sync up with the changes requested by this integration?
-Is there anything else I should avoid doing to ensure my heating doesnāt go hawire?
Wow, seems a lot more powerful alreadyā¦ Does the demand work better than the standard evohome integration? Seems like itās more ārealā rather than āestimatedā.
I have pushed an update to both repos this morning with several bugfixes/improvementnts, including the return of zone data (is read only), and elimination of the āgapsā in the graphsā¦
Presently, this system operates in a āeavesdropā mode - it mostly listens, but does send some commands in the first minute or so to discoverā parts of the system.
Yes, you can run the two together. I have anecdotal evidence that it seems impossible to ābreakā a controller by sending it dodgy commands over RF; infrequently the controller has had to be rebooted after being (intentionally) sent poorly-formed commands.
You cannot set temps with it at present - when it gets to the stage that you can, this will be OK (this RF integration will ask the controller to change itās state, and the RESTful integration (original API) polls data that is sourced from the controller.
The long-term plan is to have this (optionally) replace the evohome controller - you can be listen-only, or read-write, or full replacement.
Yes, this integration has to be better - the RESTful integration is essentially guessing, and is binary rather than a %.
.
So when you say read-write or full replacement, do you mean that read write would work alongside an operational evohome controller, and full replacement would mean having no evohome controller? Would there be anything you could do without the evohome controller that you couldnāt do with the controller still there? Currently I override the evohome controller with automations that put it into permanent manual during the summer, spring, and fall months with the heat level changing based on the weather forecast, and also for special events like if we have a guest or someone staying home who would normally be at school/work. But once the temperature is low enough I hand over to the evohome controllerās standard schedule. I do like having that as a backup incase I do something to brick my hass setup, which is not completely unknown to happen.
Controlling locally would be quite nice for me too, as the REST interface performs very slowly for me, like 5-10 seconds before I see the requested changes take effect. It doesnāt inspire much confidence with my family when they use it because they think it didnāt do anything when the state goes back to what it was before prior to really changing to what they set it to.
But even just for more accurate graphs it will be very nice. The graphs are probably the thing I actually use the most, as when the system is working as intended, no manual intervention is needed.
Three modes:
a) eavesdrop: listens for data that is not available via Honeywellās official RESTful API
b) augment: send commands direct to controller, rather than via Honeywellās internet servers
c) control: Honeywell controller turned permanently off (no devcies will be bound it it anyway) everything controlled by this code
a & b) will work with a HGI80, c) will require an RFbee or similar.
Yes. For example: more than 12 zones, more than 1 DHW, use devices other than from Honeywell as thermostats, TRVs, etc. Use different algorithms for zone temps, etc. All this is possible only with option c).
I am not sure what you mean by this: I cannot see option c) being any faster than IRL (i.e. if you make a change via your local controller).
Changes via HA (then to internet, then to controller) introduce a delay of a few seconds, but youāve got to wait fro the TRVs to next poll the controller in any case (that takes minutes).
That answers all my questions, thanks! Some clarification below.
Making changes from the evohome controller shows up in the evohome UI instantly as being changed, so thatās not an issue, even if in reality itās a few minutes before the TRV is updated.
But making changes from hass UI usually results in the setpoint in the hass UI going back to the temperature it was set at previously, and then after 10-20 seconds finally changing back to the setpoint I tried to set it to originally (at which time the evohome controller UI updates too). Iām assuming the lag is just the cloud API responding very slowly to the request and hoping this would be fixed with local controlā¦
Can this also work with Hometronic Manager āHCM200Dā?
As basically āHGI80ā was developed for āHCM200Dāā¦
Iām asking because I have HCM200D based system working perfectly since many years.
The only āminusā - no way to integrate it with other systems (no info in Internet).
@dariusz I think your chances are fairly good, Iāve already picked up traffic that suggests the HGI80 is compatible with the Residential Network Protocol.
Easiest thing to do is download & run it! Youād have to connect the HGI80 directly to a system running python, but if it was needed for other purposes, thereās no reason why you couldnāt have two HGI80s, the second used by HA.
This has got to do with convergence within HA - it is an issue with all polled systems. It is just that the convergence is greater for cloud-based systems, and thus more noticeable. Switching to b) would make this period of time very small, and to c) would eliminate convergence.
Well, I do not have yet HGI80, as I could not get answer/confirmation from local āHoneywellā that it will work with āHCM200Dā.
However Iāll consider to buy one (price ~150EUR) and give a try/testā¦
Easiest thing to do is download & run it! Youād have to connect the HGI80 directly to a system running python, but if it was needed for other purposes, thereās no reason why you couldnāt have two HGI80s, the second used by HA.