Hi Scott,
I'm having trouble with the FireCracker interface and the new release of HouseBot.
I didn't test this in beta so I'm sorry to have not caught it earlier.
When I send a command via the FireCracker interface it seems to get repeated forever. Send a second command and the two commands get repeated forever.
I thought it might be a loop between the W800 and the firecracker but when I disable the W800 interface the FireCracker still repeats the commands.
Mark
HB Version 3.0 and FireCracker
HB Version 3.0 and FireCracker
Last edited by kilowatt on Fri Jun 15, 2007 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This setup has:
USB PowerLinc, Modem, FireCracker, W800 interfaces.
It has 2 X10 controller devices. one is linked to the FireCracker interface and the other is linked to the PowerLinc interface.
If I have the FireCracker interface enabled, and send a command via the firecracker, I see the command repeating on both x10 controller devices composite property. When I disabled the FireCracker just now HouseBot crashed. And I had to restart it. If the FireCracker interface is disabled the commands sent via the PowerLinc are not repeated over and over. They are sent out once as expected.
This installation is at a remote location so I can't see if the Powerlink is repeating the command onto the power lines when the FireCracker in enabled and repeating them.
I hope this helps. I'll try to reproduce it on my local setup and see if I can learn anymore.
Mark
USB PowerLinc, Modem, FireCracker, W800 interfaces.
It has 2 X10 controller devices. one is linked to the FireCracker interface and the other is linked to the PowerLinc interface.
If I have the FireCracker interface enabled, and send a command via the firecracker, I see the command repeating on both x10 controller devices composite property. When I disabled the FireCracker just now HouseBot crashed. And I had to restart it. If the FireCracker interface is disabled the commands sent via the PowerLinc are not repeated over and over. They are sent out once as expected.
This installation is at a remote location so I can't see if the Powerlink is repeating the command onto the power lines when the FireCracker in enabled and repeating them.
I hope this helps. I'll try to reproduce it on my local setup and see if I can learn anymore.
Mark
Scott,
Ok, I reproduced it here.
It seems I didn't wait long enough after disabling the W800. It is a loop with the firecracker sending an RF command and the w800 receiving it.
It seems you changed the way things work so X10 commands received from the w800 are automatically sent on the X10 interfaces.
I use a bunch of RF things like remotes, security devices, and wall switches. I want to have HouseBot receive these but I don't necessarily want them sent out the X10 interfaces. Sometimes I trigger a task that sends totally different X10 commands based on what RF was received. My task sends the appropriate X10 commands which may or may not match the RF command received.
Sending the RF command out automatically will cause problems if I use a FireCracker interface with a W800.
Mark
Ok, I reproduced it here.
It seems I didn't wait long enough after disabling the W800. It is a loop with the firecracker sending an RF command and the w800 receiving it.
It seems you changed the way things work so X10 commands received from the w800 are automatically sent on the X10 interfaces.
I use a bunch of RF things like remotes, security devices, and wall switches. I want to have HouseBot receive these but I don't necessarily want them sent out the X10 interfaces. Sometimes I trigger a task that sends totally different X10 commands based on what RF was received. My task sends the appropriate X10 commands which may or may not match the RF command received.
Sending the RF command out automatically will cause problems if I use a FireCracker interface with a W800.
Mark
I guess my preferred way to handle RF receive would be to have a device that is an RF receiver device. It would have an RF received property which would allow you to monitor what RF commands are received. You can use it to trigger tasks. Perhaps it could have another property which would enable/disable automatically repeating the received commands on the X10 interfaces.
I use X10 Transmitter devices to monitor the RF switches I have. I'm not sure the best way to handle these. Perhaps they could be set to use the W800 interface verses to PowerLinc interface so they still reflect the received RF x10 commands.
I use X10 Transmitter devices to monitor the RF switches I have. I'm not sure the best way to handle these. Perhaps they could be set to use the W800 interface verses to PowerLinc interface so they still reflect the received RF x10 commands.
I did 'fix' something in V3 where commands weren't being echoed when they should have been. The idea was to be able to echo RF X10 commands out a powerline interface using a Task. It wasn't working before, but now it does. Apparently there's a bit too much echoing going on right now.
It's tricky to detect the echos from the actual signals. I'll have to give it another look.
It's tricky to detect the echos from the actual signals. I'll have to give it another look.
Scott
I don't have a task that tries to echo all the RF commands. So they must be getting echoed automatically now.
I have tasks that monitor the PowerLinc Composite Property and then take action when one of my RF senders is recognized. I use X10 Transmitter devices to mirror my RF switches. When the power state of these change either from a RF command received or from a software remote change, a task wakes up and executes my desired response. I also have some X10 cameras that are controlled by another program. It sends out RF commands to cycle the cameras. Again I use X10 Transmitter devices to represent the cameras. The cameras are controlled by the power lines and are mapped to the equivalent RF X10 house/unit code. Here I use a task that monitors the PowerLinc composite property and sets the power state property of the X10 Transmitters to cause the RF commands to repeat onto the power lines via the PowerLinc Interface. This eliminates the need for an external X10 RF to power line transceiver module.
It almost seems there should be two different X10 networks represented. One that is power line and one that is RF. If a command is sent to via the FireCracker interface or received via a w800 or MR26A it should be reflected in all the x10 devices that are linked to the RF network. If a command is sent or received by a power line interface it should be reflected in all the x10 devices that are power line devices. The user should use tasks to repeat desired commands between these two networks. And if an external RF to powerline transceiver is used the RF commands will be heard by the power line interface.
Mark
I have tasks that monitor the PowerLinc Composite Property and then take action when one of my RF senders is recognized. I use X10 Transmitter devices to mirror my RF switches. When the power state of these change either from a RF command received or from a software remote change, a task wakes up and executes my desired response. I also have some X10 cameras that are controlled by another program. It sends out RF commands to cycle the cameras. Again I use X10 Transmitter devices to represent the cameras. The cameras are controlled by the power lines and are mapped to the equivalent RF X10 house/unit code. Here I use a task that monitors the PowerLinc composite property and sets the power state property of the X10 Transmitters to cause the RF commands to repeat onto the power lines via the PowerLinc Interface. This eliminates the need for an external X10 RF to power line transceiver module.
It almost seems there should be two different X10 networks represented. One that is power line and one that is RF. If a command is sent to via the FireCracker interface or received via a w800 or MR26A it should be reflected in all the x10 devices that are linked to the RF network. If a command is sent or received by a power line interface it should be reflected in all the x10 devices that are power line devices. The user should use tasks to repeat desired commands between these two networks. And if an external RF to powerline transceiver is used the RF commands will be heard by the power line interface.
Mark
Me too! Although I haven't filled all the X10 codes, I'm on my way. I'd like to see the echo switchable, to allow a task to be set up to do the echo. That way you can echo only the commands you want to.kilowatt wrote:I guess my preferred way to handle RF receive would be to have a device that is an RF receiver device. It would have an RF received property which would allow you to monitor what RF commands are received. You can use it to trigger tasks. Perhaps it could have another property which would enable/disable automatically repeating the received commands on the X10 interfaces.
I use X10 Transmitter devices to monitor the RF switches I have. I'm not sure the best way to handle these. Perhaps they could be set to use the W800 interface verses to PowerLinc interface so they still reflect the received RF x10 commands.
Scott,
Is the RF echo done at the device or interface level?
It seems if I delete the X10 controller device for the FireCracker interface it breaks the loop between the FireCracker and the W800. I assume that is because the echo is done at the device level and without the FireCracker X10 controller device the commands are no longer echoed out to the RF world.
This solves my problem and allows HouseBot to behave like a whole house RF to power line transceiver as I think you intended. I still like the idea of the echo being optional so I can control the mapping between the RF commands and the power line devices. Obviously I can still do that by keeping separate the house/unit codes I use in RF verses power line.
Mark
Is the RF echo done at the device or interface level?
It seems if I delete the X10 controller device for the FireCracker interface it breaks the loop between the FireCracker and the W800. I assume that is because the echo is done at the device level and without the FireCracker X10 controller device the commands are no longer echoed out to the RF world.
This solves my problem and allows HouseBot to behave like a whole house RF to power line transceiver as I think you intended. I still like the idea of the echo being optional so I can control the mapping between the RF commands and the power line devices. Obviously I can still do that by keeping separate the house/unit codes I use in RF verses power line.
Mark
Ok great, that should work also.
So will we now be able to select the W800 as the hardware interface for our X10 devices? Will we be able to have a W800 X10 controller device that shows all the RF commands in it's composite property? That would work great as someone could choose to have a task that echoes all the RF to the power line X10 controller deivce if they desire to have HouseBot act like a whole house tranceiver.
Mark
So will we now be able to select the W800 as the hardware interface for our X10 devices? Will we be able to have a W800 X10 controller device that shows all the RF commands in it's composite property? That would work great as someone could choose to have a task that echoes all the RF to the power line X10 controller deivce if they desire to have HouseBot act like a whole house tranceiver.
Mark
Yes, you will now be able to select the W800 (or MR26) as the Hardware Interface for the device. Although sending (changing the X10 command properties) will do nothing since the W800 is a receive only interface, the association will allow the W800 to limit which Devices are sent the RF notifications.
Scott