Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Great! Thanks for the help!
It looks like I could try either of your solutions.
I have tried powering 2 solenoids on one controller by disabling the sequential flag in the software and it works fine. The amperage is still under what the transformer is rated for.
Also, I do have 2 identical transformers.
Oops…here’s the photos.
Attachments:
Thanks for the reply Larryglz. Your second assumption is correct, my 2 commons are independent for each 8 zones.
Sorry, looking back at it, my first post isn’t very clear. I’ll try to describe it better:
Let’s just say I have 1 controller. I want to be able to water twice as fast, so 2 zones on at the same time.
Here are some photos that may be helpful.
The photo with 1 controller has all 8 zones used, with 1 common wire. I think it’s a pretty standard setup. I can only water 1 zone at a time. (If I wanted to water more than 1 zone at a time, I would have to disable sequential flags and schedule start times manually for 4 zones. Or I could connect two wires to one port. Those solutions are too troublesome for how I use the sprinklers.)
The photo with 2 controllers is how I think it would work best for me, as long as it works electrically. That’s my stumbling block. I want to split the 8 zones between 2 controllers. Then, can I just jumper a common wire from 1 controller to the other, like I have the bare copper wire in the photo?
Awesome! No worries Samer, I understand; no hurry. I really appreciate your and everyone else’s hard work on OpenSprinkler! If I ever get decent at coding, I’d love to try to help.
It’s so awesome to see a constantly improving product and one where developers implement community suggestions (or capable users can even change the code themselves, to suit their specific needs). I can’t imagine something like this happening with a more proprietary design. It also shows the power of open source.
Thanks Samer!
I couldn’t seem to edit either of my posts…but in thinking about the topic further, I don’t think it wouldn’t be necessary to implement it for the manually running zones on the home screen. I think it could be useful for the configuration settings of each of the home screen zones, like where there are the “basic” and “advanced” tabs.
Also, if it wasn’t clear, when the next or previous zone button is pressed, it should save the changes to that zone; so it would pretty much be the same as “Submit”, but it would allow you to remain in the dialog box view.
Great! Sounds good. One more app UI idea I just thought of…when editing a zone in a program, it would be useful to have a previous and next zone button, maybe toward the top of the dialogue. (I edited a screenshot to get a basic idea of how it might look.) It could just be an arrow, or it could say something like “previous” or “next.” Actually, it could be a swipe left or right too, but I think a button is more in keeping with the current design of the app. The button only would probably be my preference.
I would find this extremely useful since I edit my zone times frequently. Having a “next” or arrow button, where I basically stay right in that dialogue box mode would be more efficient than having to go out of the dialogue, having reorient my eyes to find the next zone on the list, and then tap it.
Anyhow, the app is great! I love being able to see all the zone times at once on the Edit Programs screen (something not possible with an old irrigation controller like I had). When editing a station time it’s very cool to have the ability to click the plus or minus for a quick time change. But then there is also the option to click the number, and then the number pad comes up, to facilitate a more drastic time changes. I also like how if you click on the number to edit, it goes back to zero, so a time can quickly be zero’d out. These implementations are perfect! I feel my “next/arrow button” would further capitalize on these efficiencies.
Attachments:
