top | item 42431527

(no title)

wakeforce | 1 year ago

I'd love to build this. I have access to a 3d printer, use Python, and have some electronics experience. I live in a northern climate and have been eyeing ERV systems for a while. Basically, I'm the perfect target for this.

However, reading the docs, they seem written more to discourage any kind of DIY attempt by saying things A, B or C are difficult, than actually explaining how to do them correctly. I'd love to contribute to the project, but it feels like it's not set-up to foster community contribution.

If I'm mistaken, I'd love to donate some of my time on this!

discuss

order

turtlebits|1 year ago

Unfortunately the recovery core, which is the interesting part of an ERV, is not included in the 3d stl's.

IMO, this feels like a more marketing project than anything open. ERVs are already very simple (a recovery core + blowers/fans). Commercial units last an extremely long time (some with 10 year warranties) and have comprehensive parts availability.

Also a long term window install is a bit janky and is likely to lose out on efficiency due to glass being a poor insulator.

NavinF|1 year ago

I'm pretty sure stls/regen.stl is the recovery core you're taking about tho I can't open it in a online stl viewer: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1py2YwmwBEcvmdw18SKwx...

In the photos it seems to be a bunch of nested single-perimeter cylinders that are joined at a few points to maintain spacing. Easy enough to model, but I agree the documentation is horrible and there's no way to contribute.

Commercial units are not comparable because they're way more expensive despite being so simple

open_erv2|1 year ago

There is the tw4, which is made to be put in a wall, and there is the WM12, which goes in the window. The main focus is the TW4. There are instructions in the manual for making an ERV core. It is not trivial.

Aurornis|1 year ago

I expected a community open source project from the title, but reading the docs led me to the same conclusion: The website is about convincing you to buy one while discouraging you from attempting to build one.

It looks like a fun project. I don’t want to discount what has been designed and built. It is confusing to start reading about the project and discover that it’s more of a business than a community project while simultaneously being unavailable for purchase. The person who built it commented on HN that they’re focused on a 3rd different fan project right now, which brings the future of this project into question.

It would be great if a community effort could fork this project and work on making it easier to DIY so the community could push it forward.

EDIT: After exploring the files I’m not sure I’d even call this open source. I either can’t find some key files or they’re deliberately excluded. True open source projects would also include the CAD source, not only .STLs so others could adapt and modify the source. I think the open angle on this project is more marketing than substance.

open_erv2|1 year ago

The step files are also there, which is the best common denominator for CAD files. Again, it's open source for the purpose of maintenance and repair, not cloning, and frankly earlier on I did make it more community oriented and nobody ever contributed even a little bit, so I just gave up on that idea.

The most likely scenario for longer term is that people may submit minor patches or suggestions, which I roll into the hardware or firmware. In reality, hardware is not like software. You can't make changes easily. Some wizards may take it upon themselves to spruce up the firmware with fancy features and release something, which anyone is free to do. There would then be multiple compatible versions of the firmware, one which I curate for reliability with minimal features, and others which others can provide. Same as for 3d printer firmware.

  The firmware is Micropython, which is extremely easy to understand and modify.

zajio1am|1 year ago

It is not open source (per OSI definition), as it is under CC BY-NC-SA.