Is wireless technology suited for lighting control?

We hear a lot about the rise of wireless lighting control solutions, but is this a trend founded on the needs of the customer, or are we in danger of creating a disconnect between what users want and what solutions providers want to offer? Taking control of our lighting systems should be a no-brainer; it saves money, reduces carbon footprints, and, when done properly, has no negative impact on business operation. In reality, however, many buildings have yet to take this simple measure. Lighting control systems, despite being a mature technology, are still relatively new for many users, specifiers, installers and designers. In this challenging market, additional complexity could risk slowing uptake rather than accelerating it.

Wireless has an aspiration to be a bottom-up technology that grows to become ubiquitous. The booming connected home market is beginning to show us how this can work. But much of this trend is driven by personal interest, novelty and convenience. In the commercial market the drivers are more straightforward; cost savings, security, reliability. Wireless has its place, but it also has its limitations. Mesh and WiFi networks have been around for more than 10 years, but wireless hasn’t yet become the norm for commercial property control systems. One reason is that copper is more reliable and less expensive. Building owners trust it, it’s easy to specify and it presents little risk to the installer. For commercial applications, reliability is paramount. Teething problems that cause inconvenience in the home are not acceptable to a large business or in a public building.

Recent consumer reports suggest WiFi connectivity has caused problems in some cases, with accounts of heating systems shutting down after automatic updates. What if the same thing were to happen in a school or hospital? Many lighting control systems are simply set up according to predefined commissioning instructions and then handed over. Are end users prepared and confident enough to solve manufacturers’ problems? There are many other questions that wireless technology needs to address. The specification of lighting systems involves a complex delivery chain and system design needs to take into account the available skill-set of those who will carry out the work on site. What new tools will we expect tomorrow’s electricians to carry: iPads and wireless routers? If so, will installation contractors accept the inevitable cost of upskilling the personnel on site? From the end-user’s perspective, how responsive will suppliers be to the day-to-day experience of using a control system? Will it adjust to user needs and feedback to ensure maximum savings and full functionality? When it comes to ensuring that performance meets specification, will the tools and software required to maintain a system need to be built into the system cost?

Lighting a building effectively, running the system efficiently, and ensuring that staff can maintain it correctly is still a real challenge. We should look for clear evidence that customers can fix things themselves and that there is no additional cost to achieve this. Most importantly, manufacturers need to ensure that they have the resource and commitment to resolve any issues that may arise from new developments in technology. We can’t expect or allow the unwary consumer to inherit a legacy of abandoned ideas.