The standard packetflux daisy chain capability is a must. Let us add existing joints to the assembly brother. And also that blank mount for the guts of the r port existing, and the packetflux screwdiverz, and popcorn, and a pony that poops out unicorns On Mar 8, 2016 5:44 PM, "George Skorup" <geo...@cbcast.com> wrote:
> What we have at most sites is a SiteMonitor Base and an injector or two of > some time. A couple old 4 ports, an 8 port, or a 4 port + SyncInjector, > etc. So a "couple" expansion modules is probably enough in most cases. A > few newer sites have the 5ch PDUs + 2 relay / 3 switch. One site has the > temperature controller module. > > So, on the rack mount unit, if you could give me an expansion bus to add > the 2-relay / 3 switch module to monitor the DC UPS, or to add the temp > control module, etc, that would be awesome. Another idea is a third voltage > input for watching utility power with a dumb little power supply. It > wouldn't need to power anything, just monitoring only. > > The other thing is shunts. I have some sites with shunts on the DC UPS > battery negative side so that when I get a utility outage alarm, I can > confirm that the site is running on battery. I've had numerous situations > where I get a utility restore alarm, but we're still on battery, because > the utility voltage is still <100VAC. That's so annoying, but at least with > the shunts I know what's going on. > > On 3/8/2016 3:02 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: > > Oh, I don't think I finished replying to this one... if it's a dup, just > ignore this reply or the other one... > > My intent is to build this with a standalone web interface and a SNMP MIB > which is designed for this device. This should enable a bit easier > management. I may consider adding an expansion bus output for those of > you who want to add on a module or two, but I haven't decided about this > yet. > > I think the others I've pretty much answered, and for those I have I > haven't, your thinking is pretty much identical to mine. > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 1:23 PM, George Skorup <geo...@cbcast.com> wrote: > >> I could go either way. 4x4 for 16 or 6x3 for 18. More ports is always >> cool. I guess whatever makes the most sense to you would be fine with me. >> >> This really comes down to being able to power just about anything >> imaginable... except for Trango's crazy licensed POE scheme, power >> consumption and -48. Which is fine, I'll do something else for those. >> >> I can make use of the 12-port DIN mount at many sites. And this rack >> mount for the bigger sites is icing on the cake. This will let me get rid >> of all the fuses and really simplify the wiring. So I'm in. >> >> Are you planning for this to be a SiteMonitor + SyncInjector in the same >> chassis all integrated? An expansion bus would definitely be needed. Unless >> you're designing this more like the stand-alone generator controller....? >> >> On 3/8/2016 1:40 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: >> >> Well, it looks like it might actually be finally happening. >> >> We are about 98% sure we have a rackmount enclosure manufacturer which we >> can work with. Domestic. Product looks decent. Price is right. >> >> Which means it's time to nail down a few details here, such as number of >> ports, so I can get some enclosures cut and boards made and hopefully get >> this elephant out of the room.... >> >> So I need some input: >> >> The rough figures I'm working with here is $800 for a 18 port rackmount >> power injector. Voltage and pinning jumper selectable per port. Per-port >> control of power and sync. Probably some redundant power and other things >> built in, but I'm still nailing those details down (a lot of it comes down >> to space on the front panel of the enclosure). >> >> PLEASE NOTE: The prices here are soft - until I get the design completed >> I won't know what I can sell this for - as many of you know I try to price >> things at a fair price as opposed to what the market will bear. >> >> The main questions I have for the list are: >> >> Is 18 the correct number of ports? 18 is looking like about the most I >> can fit based on front panel dimensions. This corresponds to 3 blocks of 6 >> ports (if you lose a port and need to replace it, you'd replace 6 at a >> time). >> >> Other options are 16 (4 blocks of 4), and pretty much any smaller >> quantities of ports which are divisible by 4 or 6. >> >> I guess what I'm really asking here is whether the 18 port version for >> $800 is the only version of this I should make or carry, or does it make >> sense to sell (as an example) an 8 port version for $400 instead of or in >> addition to this? >> >> >> >> -- >> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* >> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 >> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> >> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux> >> >> >> > > > -- > *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* > Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 > forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> > <http://twitter.com/@packetflux> > > >
