|
|
|
0 members (),
42
guests, and
2
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums13
Topics7,385
Posts40,944
Members10,040
| |
Most Online3,137 Apr 9th, 2026
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2023
Posts: 52
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Aug 2023
Posts: 52 |
In recent years Otis has been obsoleting a lot of their door operators that are connected via serial/multidrop to their controllers MCSS/LMCSS board. This includes AT400, i-MOTION II and many of the older operators that were interfaced via an DISS/ADISS to a controller like the E411.
Is there a non-Otis solution that allows these existing Otis serial/multi-drop operator to be replaced, without having to get the Otis controller reconfigured to use a discrete door interface (assuming that is even possible)?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2023
Posts: 52
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Aug 2023
Posts: 52 |
Follow-up thought - if someone were to develop a door operator that could speak the Otis serial/multi-drop (and maybe even CAN) door protocols, is this something that non-Otis companies would buy in situations where they were already maintaining the original Otis equipment under contract?
This might allow them to continue to maintain these units rather than paying for another newer Otis door operator like a Glide A that locks them into buying even more Otis spare parts (or locks them out if it requires an Otis mechanic with special tools). If the building owner decided to modernize the controllers (which would be an expensive "nuclear option" to get away from Otis proprietary equipment), that Glide A might not be compatible with the next control system.
A lot of those older Otis controllers like E411 seem to "just work" for many years with some TLC, but door operators inevitably wear out mechanically or the drive motors and electronics die from millions of open-close cycles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,766 Likes: 11
ElevatorPractitioner
|
|
ElevatorPractitioner
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,766 Likes: 11 |
I think there’s a reason we don’t see this kind of aftermarket device for proprietary communication protocols. Even if someone got the communication protocol specifications and made a serial to discrete adapter board it would very likely be illegal to sell.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 176 Likes: 9
member
|
|
member
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 176 Likes: 9 |
For me, I think the replacement Glide operator is easy enough exchange from the AT400, that I would not bother trying something aftermarket. Why risk not having the proper interface? The one thing I will say about the glide is you need to adjust it manually, where at400s the self learn was all it needed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 280 Likes: 5
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 280 Likes: 5 |
Just out of curiosity what adjustment are you making after the learn run? I typically turn down the holding torques a bit but other then that I dont have to touch anything unless I get a vibration in the open or something like that
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 176 Likes: 9
member
|
|
member
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 176 Likes: 9 |
Just out of curiosity what adjustment are you making after the learn run? I typically turn down the holding torques a bit but other then that I dont have to touch anything unless I get a vibration in the open or something like that 42” side slides, doors tend to bang open so i have to adjust the openoffset, unitec says its because my doors are “a little on tbeogbtvside”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HW PM
by Chris, January 13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|