Hi
I know that the maximum number of devices in one Z-Wave network is 254 (232 netto).
But what is the maximum number of devices in network with more than one controller?
Is it possible to multiply capacity of network by adding more Veras?
One of my customers wants to use Z-Wave with 1000 devices.
I think it is not good idea, but Customer is king.
My proposal was to use few separated Z-Wave networks, but he didn’t like it.
It is easy to make many networks and manage them from one PC.
But how to manage eg. switching off all 500 lights or changing temperature in 500 Danfoss thermostats by one click?
Maybe any Luup / Lua program?
How slow will work such network? I can’t ask “how fast?”
Z-Wave is also limited by the number of hops a message can take (5 I think), so unless those 1000 devices will be sitting reasonably close together, they won’t be able to talk to each other from one end to the other anyway.
For such a large installation I’d recommend KNX (KNX - Wikipedia) Robust and proven in large networks (office blocks and the like), but the equipment is rather expensive.
Vera 3 is reported to support an aggregated total of ~1000 devices by bridging networks with other controllers. You would should have control of the entire network from a single unit and it would should appear to be a single network.
Even if Vera could directly support those devices, there would be limitations on distance due to hop count and a maximum 2MB backup / restore limit. 1000 devices may be around 5MB, I would not want to be in your shoes to restore that network.
I believe there are UPnP issues at the moment that would put the brakes on bridging networks. Maybe @Ap15e or oTi@ could give you more insight in that area.
You may also want to ask MCV how routing and healing would work in a network of that size. My guess is, the 3.20 algorithm would need to be tweaked.
As for bridging Vera units. I successfully Vera 3 and Vera 3 Lite bridge together. Vera 3 is the main and Vera 3 Lite as the slave. So bridging does work. I am not sure if @oTi solved his bridging issue.
What is the drain on power when you start adding multiple Z-Wave devices on a mesh network? Has anyone tried to put 100+ in their home? Unlike powerline carrier systems, X10, Insteon, HomePlug CC, CEBus, and LON Radio Frequency systems like Z-Wave do not suffer from Impedance Loading when additional transmitters are added to a network. In fact, in an RF mesh network the more devices you have the stronger and more fault tolerant your network becomes.
There is a 232-device limit to a single Z-Wave network, however it is not hard to tie multiple networks together using a bridging device if more than 232 nodes are required. This is similar to sub-netting in an IP network. I have seen and installed Z-Wave networks with more than 100 nodes. When establishing a network this large it is helpful, but not required, to use a PC-based controller to configure the network.
[quote=“garrettwp, post:4, topic:170400”]As for bridging Vera units. I successfully Vera 3 and Vera 3 Lite bridge together. Vera 3 is the main and Vera 3 Lite as the slave. So bridging does work. I am not sure if @oTi solved his bridging issue.
Garrett[/quote]
Do you know if Vera’s with different UI’s can be bridged?
One of my customers wants to use Z-Wave with 1000 devices.
I think it is not good idea, but Customer is king.
My proposal was to use few separated Z-Wave networks, but he didn't like it.
There is no way to have more than 232 Z-Wave devices in a single Z-Wave network (with the same Home ID).
Bridging several Veras might work, but introduces a single point of failure. Building a tree of bridged Veras might work, but introduces high complexity and a maintenance nightmare. The Z-Wave collision domain might be a an additional problem.
Don’t use polling, i.e. only use Z-Wave devices that support instant status reporting.
Use direct Z-Wave associations as much as possible.
Make sure you cannot get sued by your customer.
But how to manage eg. switching off all 500 lights
Thanks everybody.
I see, this topic touched on all.
It could be big deal
Yes, I remember about this. ;D .
The customer wants to save money and buy system as cheap as possible.
Maybe Z-Wave is cheap but I am afraid of liability.
[quote=“Ap15e, post:7, topic:170400”]That’s an easy one, if your lights support [tt]COMMAND_CLASS_SWITCH_ALL[/tt]:
[tt]http://forum.micasaverde.com/index.php/topic,9080.0.html[/tt][/quote]
I am not sure Ap15e if you are right. If I can not have more than 232 devices I can switch_ALL only 232 lights - not 500.
I don’t understand how it is possible to control more than 254 devices after coupling Veras?
Veras will have the same Home ID. Am I right? And for node ID there is only 8 bits = 254.
So in my opinion it is not possible to control 1000 or 500 devices by several Veras coupled in one network.
I hope I am wrong.
Building is 120m x 30m x 5 floors
My idea is to put several eg. 10 Veras (100 devices per Vera) and not coupling them.
I could use any PC to control all Veras and special aplication will gather all interfaces of 10 Veras in one.
If I would like to switch off all 1000 devices this “special interface” on PC will send SWITCH_ALL command similtanously to 10 Vera and then each Vera will send [tt]COMMAND_CLASS_SWITCH_ALL[/tt] to all of own devices.
Is it possible?
The second thing is, if so many RF devices can work close together even they will have different HOME ID?
I am not sure Ap15e if you are right. If I can not have more than 232 devices I can switch_ALL only 232 lights - not 500.
[tt]AOO[/tt] controls all Z-Wave devices attached to the Vera [tt]AOO[/tt] is running on. So yes, the maximum number of devices is 232 per Vera. Each Vera advertises her [tt]AOO[/tt] as an UPnP device that provides the UPnP actions [tt]AllOn[/tt] and [tt]AllOff[/tt], so you could use an UPnP control point or MiOS’s [tt]http-UPnP[/tt] gateway to control several Veras - or setup a MiOS scene that controls all instances of [tt]AOO[/tt].
For me, I can import the devices from the other Vera, but not all the device UIs are rendered fully. Seems to be that on/off switches and t-stats are fine, but e.g. dimmers, locks and door sensors are not. I have not looked into it further.
[quote=“Peraverde, post:9, topic:170400”]I don’t understand how it is possible to control more than 254 devices after coupling Veras?
Veras will have the same Home ID.[/quote]
You’d be importing the devices from the other Veras, all of which are in their own Z-Wave network (i.e. HomeID), so you can control those devices from a single Vera. That Vera will send commands to the other Veras through your LAN. See also the wiki page.
OK. I begin to understand.
Should I use “Add UPnP devices” to couple Veras?
I wonder how to test so big network.
I don’t want to set up 1000 real devices, even I don’t have so many.
Is it possible to create many (eg 230) dummy devices in each Vera?
My idea is to set up few real devices separately in each Vera and set up many dummy devices,
to be sure that every Z-Vave network contains devices with the same Node ID.
Then Veras should be coupled by “Add UPnP device”
And then test if you can control nodes with the same ID.
It will be incomplete test, because most of the devices will be dummy,
and because RF interferences will be smaller (only few real devices).
For me, I can import the devices from the other Vera, but not all the device UIs are rendered fully. Seems to be that on/off switches and t-stats are fine, but e.g. dimmers, locks and door sensors are not. I have not looked into it further.
[quote=“Peraverde, post:9, topic:170400”]I don’t understand how it is possible to control more than 254 devices after coupling Veras?
Veras will have the same Home ID.[/quote]
You’d be importing the devices from the other Veras, all of which are in their own Z-Wave network (i.e. HomeID), so you can control those devices from a single Vera. That Vera will send commands to the other Veras through your LAN. See also the wiki page.[/quote]
I added a dimmable light to the Vera Lite that is bridged to my Vera 3 and the light shows up and displays fine on the Vera 3.
[quote=“oTi@, post:15, topic:170400”]Thanks @garrettwp. I’ll reduce things to a small test network and see how things go.[/quote]Maybe your issue is related to the issue that AP15e was having where UPnP was flaky on his box with the weather plugin installed?
I saw the thread and guessed made the changes that AP15 mentioned in that thread. I loaded the changed files and have not had a problem. Makes me wonder if @oTi is having another issue somewhere to cause this.
