I am researching how I could integrate a Vera3 system with the things I want to control in my home. I have a 2 stage heat pump Carrier Infinity system that comes with the Infinity T-Stat. I don’t think a different T-Stat can be used with this system and I have not been able to find any recent posts here talking about how to successfully control a system like this with a Vera system. Does anyone know whether or not it is possible to do this?
It’s possible via RS-232 link. But I do not think it has been done yet.
See the following thread:
[url=http://forum.micasaverde.com/index.php?topic=2852.0]http://forum.micasaverde.com/index.php?topic=2852.0[/url]
Thanks for the reply. I saw that thread but was hoping since then that someone had actually done it. I hate to invest the amount of money it would take to try this only to find out it won’t work.
Two options here depending on how ambitious you are:
[ol][li]Create an implementaion for the existing thermostat device defined by D_HVAC_ZoneThermostat1.xml … This file would implement the methods by talking through the serial port to your thermostat. This only provides the functionality at the user interface that other generic thermostats provide[/li]
[li]You create your own device and UI that has all of the functionality of Infinity. This is a much more demanding task than the previous strategy.[/li][/ol]
The problem with the Infinity control, at least in your case, is that it serves as a front end for all the monitoring that goes on within the equipment. Fan speed, static pressure, supply air temperature, outdoor temperature, operating status… etc.
Some of the older Infinity systems had the ability to sort of dumb down the system, in other words connect a standard thermostat to operate it. This is supposed to be done as an emergency fix for a bad user interface until a replacement could be installed. In some of the Infinity versions the standard thermostat could not control certain functions like electric heat strips in a heat pump system. I don’t remember all the restrictions for the different system configurations off the top of my head.
Your best chance at getting it to work is if you happen to have a 1st generation Infinity system. I don’t believe they built in some of the ridiculous restrictions to the first systems. You would lose some of the bells and whistles, but you could have a fully functional multi-stage system by installing a Honeywell, or other, Zwave stat.
I have never used the Carrier link module doohickey, so I’m not sure about your level of success with that. If someone else has done it they would be better qualified to explain the ins and outs of that setup.
If your HVAC contractor has happened to leave the “Installers Guide” for the system, the user manual won’t help, you could find out if the system can be configured to fully support a standard thermostat. Don’t open any system panels if you are not comfortable working around electricity, and turn off the power to the system (there may be multiple circuit breakers involved) before attempting to change the thermostat. I can’t tell you how many service calls we make to customers changing their own stats. It’s not rocket science, but your system could be down until you can get somebody to straighten it out for you.
Hope this helps
[quote=“RichardTSchaefer, post:4, topic:170575”]Two options here depending on how ambitious you are:
[ol][li]Create an implementaion for the existing thermostat device defined by D_HVAC_ZoneThermostat1.xml … This file would implement the methods by talking through the serial port to your thermostat. This only provides the functionality at the user interface that other generic thermostats provide[/li]
[li]You create your own device and UI that has all of the functionality of Infinity. This is a much more demanding task than the previous strategy.[/li][/ol][/quote]
I also have an Infinity Zoned system and personally I think it’s the best zoning system that I’ve researched. The biggest problem is the Interface to any home automations system. Carrier only supports one way to connect that they will “Somewhat” support. If you try to directly interface to the system without their “System Access Module”, SAM, they will likely try void your warranty.
SAM is not an inexpensive module. It lists for about $900 but I’ve found it for $675. This is for the Ethernet version, if you want the WiFi version it cost a bit more. The SAM module does not need to be by the furnace you just need to be able to get a 4 conductor cable to it if you don’t.
The interface to SAM is quite simple. It’s a human readable character string sent over RS232. It’s much like the commands that you use to control a modem.
My suggestion, and the way I’ll do it if I purchase a SAM for my system, is to create t-stats for each zone based on an existing t-stat as Richard suggests. I would take it one step further and create a master t-stat that would be use for all of the non-zone setup commands. This is where you set the mode and other operating parameters for the entire system.
I need to do some more checking but I believe there is a program for the PC that simulates a SAM. If so then one could develop the plugin without needing to purchase a SAM. If not one can always just use a terminal emulator and send responses by hand.
Apparently you need the SAM module to gain the RS232 access to the controller which is really in the furnace. I acquired one and am now awaiting Carrier to make it reliable and responsive enough to be worth the effort to devleop a plugin. It is not unusual to have the service not available for days. The local access to the controller through the SAM is reliable and I have the listing, from the internet, of the RS232 commands to perform some interogation and setting but I would be losing some of the device history of notifications/confirmations from their service. They are actively working on fixing the issues around their service and there should be resolution in the next couple of months. (Big company slow IT development service). At this time I kind of wish that I hadn’t had this expensive SAM device installed. Even the installer couldn’t get it to work and I spent a week getting it to connect successfully. If anyone has thoughts about this I would appreciate them.
I’d rather see the plugin for Vera log information than paying Carrier for their service. Both should be an option. If you don’t need Carriers service it should be quite stable.
As many have said Carriers web site is not that good.
Is there any update on the communication paths between the Vera Lite and the Carrier Infinity furnaces?
Thanks for asking … I would love to know as well!
Me too! Someone in the thread I pasted below asks about the Infinity Remote Touch tstat’s capability of working with an existing plugin but the response was not likely.
http://forum.micasaverde.com/index.php/topic,9505.msg102289.html#msg102289
Here’s a link to the Infinity Remote tstat: Carrier Residential | HVAC Systems for Homeowners Any idea if it will work with Vera somehow? Not sure they had it available when I bought my Carrier HVAC system.
Carrier finally agreed with me and replaced the SAM with an Infinity Touch wireless which has been working very well. Not much chance of integrating it with Vera though as they don’t want to release the information on the protocols used. Maybe someday, when time permits, I’ll put a sniffer on it and do some reverse engineering in the meantime the iPhone app gives me remote access and control of the furnace and its components.
The Infinity Touch has a web interface at the IP address. You don’t have to go through Carrier’s server to see it. Can’t you go through that to interface with Vera? I’ll be getting one next week so I haven’t look at the http protocols yet but it should be straight forward right?
Any luck with this? I have a carrier system and would love to integrate!
I finally had my carrier infinity thermostat removed and replaced it with the Nest. Now I have all my systems working through Vera seamlessly. Never been happier. I was tired of the closed API from carrier.
Hi, any downsides to doing that - for example what do you loose on the communications front (EAC replacement, static pressure checks etc, etc, etc).
I am thinking of buying the SAM and using the RS232 port (I already have the carrier wifi touch thermostat)… what are your thoughts on that given your adventure (also know anyone who has a b-sam for sale?) 
[quote=“scyto, post:16, topic:170575”]Hi, any downsides to doing that - for example what do you loose on the communications front (EAC replacement, static pressure checks etc, etc, etc).
I am thinking of buying the SAM and using the RS232 port (I already have the carrier wifi touch thermostat)… what are your thoughts on that given your adventure (also know anyone who has a b-sam for sale?) ;)[/quote]
Did you buy the SAM?
[quote=“shay, post:17, topic:170575”][quote=“scyto, post:16, topic:170575”]Hi, any downsides to doing that - for example what do you loose on the communications front (EAC replacement, static pressure checks etc, etc, etc).
I am thinking of buying the SAM and using the RS232 port (I already have the carrier wifi touch thermostat)… what are your thoughts on that given your adventure (also know anyone who has a b-sam for sale?) ;)[/quote]
Did you buy the SAM?[/quote]I’m looking to replace the master t-stat with the web enabled touch screen version. I think it’s about the same cost as SAM and basically replaces it in many cases however I need to do a more detailed investigation on that.
The real question is if you control it via WiFi where SAM had RS232 as well. Asking the local installers gets you a blank stare so I need to see if Carrier will talk to me about it. Hopefully you can send the same commands over WiFi that you can through RS232.
I’ve been researching and it looks like even with the new touch t-stats, WiFi or not, you still need a SAM module to control the system from a HA system. You would only need the basic SAM and no monitoring service.
Carrier is stupid in that they could allow easily the HA to connect to the t-stat using telnet protocol and still use the same commands use for SAM.
Correct. Carrier clearly states that if you have a “Touch” WiFi thermostat you still need to buy and install the $800+ SAM module (which connects to the same data bus the thermostat is connected to) if you want to integrate your HA system to an Infinity system. Carrier has no interest in allowing local network access to their Touch WiFi thermostat, and these thermostats are likely designed to lock out any network communication aside from that between the thermostat and Carrier’s web site.
Someone started the laborious process of reverse engineering the APIs to the web site Carrier provides for remote user access to their Touch WiFi thermostats, and posted their results on a web page somewhere, but my impression was that it was very much a “work in progress”.