AdvancedMetering Infrastructure (AMI) presents itself as an alternative metering approach. The initial intent behind the approach was to allow Automated Meter Reading (AMR). As an outcome both these terms have ended up being common within the industry, a point which results in much confusion.You can find more information about sell house quick from this website www.propertycashbuyers.com .
Historically speaking AMR is the predecessor of AMI. Simply puts the method and innovations utilized in AMI were born out of the methodology and innovations of AMR. For purposes of our conversation we will for that reason concentrate on AMI. However, one has to have some insight into both methods in order to have a complete image of AMI.The basis for both methodologies is established in the principle
that using specialized devices and interactions techniques it is possible to collect data from metering equipment without needing to physically read or interact with the metering gadget.Typically speaking, AMR describes the ability to collect data from electricity, gas and/or water meters remotely and instantly through several various interactions networks, including RF wireless, power line carrier, telephone, and other methods.
The term AMI extends our understanding of AMR to describe a system that can gathering detailed energy usage information more regularly.
It also suggests that there is a bi-directional communication channel between the meter management system and the gadgets. Having a bidirectional communication
channel the AMI method instantly opens the scope of abilities since it allows information to be received and sent in between the metering equipment
and the meter management system. Where interaction within the STS methodology is based on Tokens that are entered into a metering device,
interaction within the AMI method is performed in-band to an interaction link. The implication of this is that there is no need to enter tokens to AMI metering
gadgets.Another fundamental difference between STS and AMI is that STS is only planned as an approach for prepayment.STS cannot be used to manage
post-paid billing. This is very important and you ought to read this paragraph once again, as the ramifications on sectional title metering can be far reaching once this apparently small distinction is understood. AMI, with roots in AMR, was initially designed to automate the meter reading process and supply this information to a local authority so that they may provide an expense to their customer. It was not designed to handle prepayment billing, it was just created to collect information and present it for billing.
For this reason most AMI meters do not have any prepayment functions. This is the precise opposite to STS which was created and still works ONLY as prepayment system. The reasoning of prepayment for that reason in AMI should be handled in software at the meter management system.The meter management and vending service provided supports both STS and AMI suitable metering systems.
As an outcome they can provide consumers a choice of STS and AMI innovations. As previously mentioned and stressed, for customers using AMI systems can provide both prepaid and post-paid billing alternatives.
While AMI provides lots of advantages over STS it is not without disadvantages. The primary downside of AMI is that it cannot be deployed as easily as STS. The reason for this is that a communications network should be established before data can be collected from meters to several devices referred to as Data Collectors.Assuming that the interactions network is in place and meters can talk to their Data Collectors, the Data Collector must be able to communicate with the meter management system where decision making can be carried out. This does increase the expense of deployment for AMI.