Passivly update status of recievers based on signals

http://automagucally.weebly.com

Moderators: davka003, Telldus

Post Reply
jimmy927
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am
Location: Stockholm
Contact:

Passivly update status of recievers based on signals

Post by jimmy927 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am

I have the following setup at home:

LCMR-1000 is switching on/off a lamp, most of the times this is done through a LWST-605 on the wall.
The LCMR-1000 listens directly to the LWST-605 on the wall.
In addition Automagically controls this device with the tellstick of course.

If the lamp is turned on and off via the LWST-605 on the wall Automagically will never be able to determine if the lamp is on or off in a given point in time.

I have tried to configure the LWST-605 to trigger a event in Automagically to turn on the lamp, and this actually works, and then Automagically always knows if it is on or off. But this is rather limited in real-world usage,
it is to sluggish and slow so it annoys users and also i am concered about the fact that nobody will be able to turn lights on/off if the PI is down, or booting or down for maint. e.t.c. In addition congestion of the 433-mhz airspace is allready showing, especially since users tend to press buttons on the well with only a very short delay in between.

So what i want is:

* Define in automagically what switchers are controlloing which recievers
* Listen to the LWST-605 ON/OFF signals and mark the LCMR-1000 as ON/OFF respectivly.
* Really only LISTEN and update, i am planning for a total of 120 NEXA-units, i will have enough congestion allready.

Why i want it:

* I want to turn off lights if they have been ON for X minutes
* I want to be able to measure used electricity based on this info, if i would reliably know if a light was on or off this info would be really useful
* I want to do smarter management of lighting then just using Motion-sensors that turn the lights off after Xm, controlling Lights with both motion sensors and for ex. also LWST-605 could be really useful. Then the system could avoid turning off lights via the motion-sensor that where turned on manually just seconds earlier.

Any thoughts ?
Is the current data-model even supporting this ? I can see there is something modelled in the remotes, but not sure if it is relevant for this use.
If not supported, how should it be extended ?
Other thoughts ?

KHolm
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am

Re: Passivly update status of recievers based on signals

Post by KHolm » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am

jimmy927 wrote:LCMR-1000 is switching on/off a lamp, most of the times this is done through a LWST-605 on the wall.
The LCMR-1000 listens directly to the LWST-605 on the wall.
In addition Automagically controls this device with the tellstick of course.

If the lamp is turned on and off via the LWST-605 on the wall Automagically will never be able to determine if the lamp is on or off in a given point in time.

Not entirely correct, but depends on your set up. What you need to do is to make is to make Automagically send the same code as the LWST-605.
Enter signal debug and turn it on. Press your LWST-605 button and refresh the trace. You should now be able to see the house and unit code used by LWST-605.

So, your LCMR-1000 shall only be learned the LWST-605 code; nothing else.

Then you modify you Raw tellstick device accordingly - and voila, Automagically follows the state of the lamp, provided that your tellstick can hear your LWST-605.

If you follow the below instruction, you can notice that the Remote's state (ON/OFF) is updated when you use your LWST-605.
http://automagically.wikia.com/wiki/Add ... off_device

jimmy927 wrote: i am planning for a total of 120 NEXA-units
...
I want to be able to measure used electricity based on this info, if i would reliably know if a light was on or off this info would be really useful

I think you should look for a Z-Wave system instead, possibly improving your Pi with RaZberry - but then you need to abandon Automagically for now.
The Nexa protocol is way to error prone to handle what you want. I think you will be disappointed having invested in such a high amount of switches.
Z-Wave is better since it is a feedback system. Each switch acknowledges its actual status to the system. Also, with the right switches you can also get individual energy consumption. I really fancy this one: https://www.m.nu/wall-plug-fibaro-p-798.html

On the controller side, Fibaro Home 2 looks neat - but I like the modularity of the Zipabox (there is a module which can be used to control Nexa switches as well).

I think the NexaHome supports Z-Wave on the Pi/RaZberry- but I don't know to what extent.

/Marcus

jimmy927
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am
Location: Stockholm
Contact:

Re: Passivly update status of recievers based on signals

Post by jimmy927 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am

KHolm wrote:
jimmy927 wrote:If you follow the below instruction, you can notice that the Remote's state (ON/OFF) is updated when you use your LWST-605.
http://automagically.wikia.com/wiki/Add ... off_device


ok, sounds great, i will give it a try!
But i have a lot of receivers that are controlled by more than just one LWST-605, will your method still work somehow ?

jimmy927
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am
Location: Stockholm
Contact:

Re: Passivly update status of recievers based on signals

Post by jimmy927 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:08 am

KHolm wrote:
jimmy927 wrote:I think you should look for a Z-Wave system instead
The Nexa protocol is way to error prone to handle what you want. I think you will be disappointed having invested in such a high amount of switches.
Z-Wave is better since it is a feedback system. Each switch acknowledges its actual status to the system. Also, with the right switches you can also get individual energy consumption. I really fancy this one: https://www.m.nu/wall-plug-fibaro-p-798.html


I agree in general.
And Z-Wave being a actual standard is great. And in the long run 433 MHZ propitiatory stuff will eventually die even though NEXA could build a LCMR-1000 or similar that feeds back a signal if turned on/off.
But currently Z-Wave is at least 3-4 times more expensive, and i have no confidence that there will be software that can control this stuff the way i want to either.
automatically does not really do everything i want either, but i have confidence in the fact that i can modify it to do what i want and it seems properly designed so far.

Just did an total inventory, i will end up with about 27 (dual) wall-transmitters and maybe about 30-50 receivers, so its not that bad. In addition to that i have about 8 sensors currently though and will probably add another 10-15 of them.
In the long run i think you are right, and Z-Wave being a open standard it might actually be cheaper one day, but i want my toys NOW, and end of the day it's the cheapest hobby i ever had.

Post Reply