Thank you for the reply. I was considering printing a box to hold the switches and a breakout box but never got around to it. I like you solution much better though. If etching of the buttons becomes an option I'm all in.
Not Your Typical Apex Toggle Switch Box
- Thread starter _AV
- Start date
- Tagged users None
A board just like yours with USB port with pin headers behind the USB ports that could be connected via a ribbon allowing one to use multiple boards in a single enclosure (as many as one desires/within module limits of the APEX.
I/O headers could simply be pin headers that one can connect whatever they desire or a pluggable DIN Port for connecting their BOB, along with pins.
Once you add pin headers the board can they be adapted to pretty much anything.
I'm excited.
Last edited:
I'll offer you one better
How about a single arduino mega with its 54 digital I/O pins which emulates multiple PM1 modules? Would that be enough?
If's it reliable and cheaper then multiple PM1s, why not.
I like the Arduino Mega idea. It would be much more powerful and flexible.
Having said that, it is my understanding that currently there is no way to communicate from Apex to these third party modules, only send open/closed (on/off) signals from the modules to Apex (basically BoB functionality). Am I right?
is there hope to change that? It would open a whole new world of possibilities.
Having said that, it is my understanding that currently there is no way to communicate from Apex to these third party modules, only send open/closed (on/off) signals from the modules to Apex (basically BoB functionality). Am I right?
is there hope to change that? It would open a whole new world of possibilities.
I’m not an expert but Imagine that even by inspecting packets, it might be very difficult to crack the protocol (bidirectional) if the manufacturer implemented some kind encrypted communication based on keys generated by the modules and Apex head unit. It may be possible, but maybe it is hard to accomplish.
If this was the case, yes.
However it’s not the case so far. Neptune wasn’t even doing any form of firmware security a few years ago and that’s not something you can fix after the fact.
However it’s not the case so far. Neptune wasn’t even doing any form of firmware security a few years ago and that’s not something you can fix after the fact.
A quick look at the Aquabus Library in GitHub documentation, it seems that they have implemented much more than BoB open/closed functionality.
Hopefully new projects like this one come out.
I wish there would be a module that can have lots of 24DC outlets that can be controlled from Apex just like the native 24DC (not 1Link) outlets that come with EB832 and 1Link modules. 2 of those ports is not enough. I like to use them to power simple dosing and ATO pumps.
Hopefully new projects like this one come out.
I wish there would be a module that can have lots of 24DC outlets that can be controlled from Apex just like the native 24DC (not 1Link) outlets that come with EB832 and 1Link modules. 2 of those ports is not enough. I like to use them to power simple dosing and ATO pumps.
Interesting... You are right. They can't break compatibility with existing modules.
This opens a lot of cool possibilities.
I like the idea of the Arduino "Apex OpenModule". Something that can give us more flexibility.
Not so fast... With this specific module you can't send anything from Apex to the module. Because you are at the mercy of the head unit. Modules are passive, they can't make the head unit do what it's not programmed to do. One could, however, create a module that emulates something like an EB832, but just for the purpose of the 24v outlets for example. But that's because the head unit already supports that type of module and the communication.
Correct. The protocol is very much geared to be a single master (the head unit). If you want more than what the stock ecosystem can do… then replace it.
Not going to say it’s that hard, but at that point it’s not that hard.
Not going to say it’s that hard, but at that point it’s not that hard.
I think i want one. Im to “slow” ti understand the breakout box. This seems so much easier to use.
Not true at all. You can't get illuminated buttons with a break out box. You don't get anything actually with a breakout box, other than the wire connectors. The rest is DIY. This is an-all-in-one, plug-and-play solution.
I’m not saying your solution is not superior. It has many advantages and potential for things like optical switches (which require power). And will save you a module if your existing BoB is full and want to expand.
I’m just thinking that it will not make any simpler the programming itself. I’m I missing something?
Similar threads
- Price: 100
- Shipping Available
