black_fx_35 Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but what is the best way to control my gas fireplace? it currently has a RF remote, but I want to be able to use the new 99i-IR to control it, so that I can create scenes and include the fireplace. Any thoughts? Thanks.
jgraziano Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 Not sure if you can utilize the RF remote, but I'll tell you how I did mine. I think it is fairly typical and there are a couple of threads on the SmartHome forum I believe. Mine has two switches for the fireplace, one for the blower and one for the fireplace on/off. The on/off simply acts as a dry contact for the gas valve power, which is derived from a thermocouple monitoring the pilot flame. If the pilot goes out, no heat to create the voltage, therefore no power to open the valve; failsafe system. So it's just a matter of placing another (Insteon controlled) dry contact either in parallel with the switch (bypass it), or in series with it, ie, both the wall switch and your new Insteon contolled dry contact have to be ON for the fireplace to light. I went with the latter, so if I turn off the wall switch, I know for sure that the fp cannot light. The issue is the dry contact. It has to be completely isolated, no voltage on it whatever. There are Insteon modules to do that: EZIO2x4 for example. Also X10 modules: UP506, which can be had on eBay new for $10. Or, if you are electrical/electronic oriented, you can do what I did. Use an Insteon or X10 appliance module to turn on/off an ice cube relay and use a set of NO contacts on that. I mounted one in a little box with a fuse and wired in a pigtail which plugs into my appliance module and a set of leads from the NO contact going to the FP, which I wired in series with the wall switch. It works great (X10 works as long as you don't have X10 transmission issues). That said I bought a UP506 to try. I have two receptacles inside the fireplace, one for blower, which I am using for the blower, and one for the remote, which I don't have. I'm going to try using the remote receptacle for my switch to see if it will work (same phase as the one that is working?). That way I won't have a little wire runing out from the fireplace. I need to check the heat level when the fp is on, though. Hope I made sense and didn't bore you with stuff you may already know!
tazal Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 If the IOlinc (2450) ever gets fully functional could I use one of these to control my fireplace? I could leave the physical wall switch in place but connect that to the sensor on an IOlinc and then use the IOlinc relay to actually turn on the fireplace. My logic thoughts are to have the following two triggers to support local control: - if sensor goes from off to on then turn on relay - if sensor goes from on to off then turn off relay You could control the relay however you like from other scenes, etc and still have the ability to flip the local switch to turn the fireplace on or off. Worst case is the local switch is on or off and you turn the fireplace (via relay) on in another fashion. Now you have a regular switch on the wall that obviously doesn't match status requiring you to flip the switch on and then off, or vice versa, to turn the fireplace on or off. Does all this seem reasonable and is there something I could replace the physical switch with that might do a better job of not confusing a user seeing the fireplace on but the switch off?
jgraziano Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 If the IOlinc (2450) ever gets fully functional could I use one of these to control my fireplace? I could leave the physical wall switch in place but connect that to the sensor on an IOlinc and then use the IOlinc relay to actually turn on the fireplace. My logic thoughts are to have the following two triggers to support local control: - if sensor goes from off to on then turn on relay - if sensor goes from on to off then turn off relay You could control the relay however you like from other scenes, etc and still have the ability to flip the local switch to turn the fireplace on or off. Worst case is the local switch is on or off and you turn the fireplace (via relay) on in another fashion. Now you have a regular switch on the wall that obviously doesn't match status requiring you to flip the switch on and then off, or vice versa, to turn the fireplace on or off. Does all this seem reasonable and is there something I could replace the physical switch with that might do a better job of not confusing a user seeing the fireplace on but the switch off? I suppose you could replace the toggle on the wall with a momentary if you can find one and then do the logic for the IO output to change states when it is pressed. I put the wall switch in series with my on/off relay because I wanted a way to definitively disable the fireplace from turning on. When that switch is off there is no way the FP will turn on period. Then the relay controls the FP, either by schedule or a console located somewhere in the room. That has worked out pretty well for us. One thing you may want to do, though. Put a bypass around the IO relay somewhere. If the power goes out in the winter and you can run your FP, it will come in handy! No blower, but at least some heat.
tazal Posted April 6, 2009 Posted April 6, 2009 I guess I liked the idea of making it easy to turn on and off without finding a keypadlinc or interfacego device to do it. That said I guess I am starting to integrate my harmony 890 which is normally in the same room as the fireplace so I could probably wire it in series and have the wall switch be only the overriding enable/disable and not directly control the functionality. Given the current problems with the using an iolinc for both sensor and relay (UG!) that probably makes it feasible in the short term as well.
Recommended Posts