Suggestions for X10/Automation Widgets

| RF Dude's request is very similar to something I would love to see (and that | I believe can even be implemented using an Ocelot controller). It would be | great to have even a simple TM751-like device that could parse a 3 "frame" | RF command string so that [6] [ENTER] + [12] [ENTER] + [ON] entered together | gets output to the powerline as F12 ON.

I did something like this with the IR input code of my replacement RR501/TM751 firmware:

Note that X10 IR codes carry no house code information while RF codes do, so I assume you are talking about using a remote that is not generating standard X10 RF. A quick hack might be to get the remote to send IR format X10 as RF. Then you could tweak my IR input code to handle the RF as well.

Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com

X-No-archive: yes On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:38:39 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@whocares.com (Dave Houston) used recycled pixels to say:

I've been wondering about the InsteaOn technology? If in fact it did only listen to your codes.

The homes here are too tightly packed together for the filter to work... I know a neighbor who tried this solution but only wasted their money - it reduced the "noise" only 5%. I've tried changing codes and had someone chase me around the letters.... I guess they liked my dim commands? who knows!

------------------------------------------------ Autobot This Spammers!

mailto:postmaster@127.0.0.1 (to reply to actual address, dispense the dots before and after sirname.

I was the OP on that segment of the question. The CM15A can act as a whole-house RF blocker if modified to look for a preamble to each code and just ignoring commands without it.

My real need is to enable a standard X-10 8-in-1 remote (UR24) to be able to send commands on all housecodes without resorting to reprogramming the remote's housecode each time.

-- Bobby G.

This is Palm Pad, correct? It's a bitch to have to twist the dial but I bought some of the extension knobs for the code dial, so it's not a big thing. The UR24 is my mainstay controller. How does that react to sending a code preamble? I know it's different from the Maxi controller where you can enter a long sequence of unit presses before pressing a function button. There is no command stacking via the UR24 that I am aware of.

It would be nice to be able to send the following:

[6] [ON] -- would default to the currently set housecode [6] [6] [ON] -- would select housecode F and turn unit 6 ON.

There could be some uniformity injected into the process if the user entered two digits for every code, padding single digit codes out with leading zeroes or they use the enter key as a code delimiter between unit commands.

I'm sure there are more profound technical issues - perhaps you'll be gracious enough to explain!

-- Bobby G.

Are you (or is anyone) aware of a ready-to-go C-Max program that does what we've been describing? I'm really a lousy C-Maxer.

That's a great idea. There are so many X-10 controllers that are very awkward to use beyond 8 unit codes. Why they didn't put a FOUR-position slide on the damn Mini-controllers is beyond me. You can mod them to use the higher ranges, but the true fix is a four position switch.

-- Bobby G.

"The code accepts X10's standard IR format as used in their remotes and IR bases. In order to support multiple house codes without requiring custom IR codes I have introduced an escape mechanism. The escape code is all-units-off. The first unit code received after an all-units-off command sets the new default house code (1=A, 2=B, etc.). The initial default house code is the house code of the base's programmed unit id. To send a real all-units-off command, follow it with a DIM."

The escape code mechanism is certainly slick. What are the issues with doing something similar with RF codes, or would I be best off trying to do all this with an Ocelot controller? I assume if I go that route I will lose RF functionality and will have to operate the system using the UR24 in IR rather than RF mode, which is pretty sucky.

In any event, I want the ability to send an occasional non-default housecode but to leave the housecode where it is set. Otherwise the "reprogram the housecode on the fly" feature of the UR24 8-in-1 remote provides just about the same results as an escape sequence that changes the default housecode.

It would be very workable if they only took out the damn delay on the SET button so that you could reprogram with a quick, uninterrupted series of button presses.

[X10] [SETUP] [Newhousecode] [Enter] isn't really that hard a sequence but it has two problems: It changes the default and you can press four or five keys in the time that it takes for the LED to come up when you hold [SETUP] down to change the code. Not very convenient.

I could have sworn I saw a UR24 mode that put an extra pushbutton on the case that you pressed to enter a temporary housecode, but I'll be damned if I can find it now!

Nope, I was talking about the UR24 8-in-1 remote that "talks" directly to the TM751.

:-) Sure I could, after a brain and hand transplant!!!!!! I can wire telephones, assemble PC's and maybe replace a blown capacitor on a motherboard, but that's where my technical abilities stop. I was hoping to entice Jeff into adding this feature to his Widget design.

-- Bobby G.

In X-10 RF mode the UR24 doesn't send anything until you press a function button. So sending double codes, while possible, doesn't seem very practical to me.

However, if you are not us>This is Palm Pad, correct? It's a bitch to have to twist the dial but I

It's a simple matter to have the universal remotes send RF at the same time as they send *any* IR. It just takes removing a diode. Batteries won't last quite as long.

The IR and RF protocols are totally different. A better idea might be to assign some AV unit that uses the NEC IR protocol to one of the device keys and then, choosing codes that don't conflict with existing X-10 RF codes, use them to add preambles. They typically send IR codes with most if not all key presses. You could use the NEC IR codes to switch housecodes and then use the X-10 buttons as you do now. The protocols are identical except for the shortcut repeat methods used by some but not all IR devices. The µPD6121 datasheet - X-10 used it in the old rectangular keychain remote - explains the protocol.

But the fatal drawback to all of these schemes are that they pretty much have to be in the firmware of the target receiver or transceiver.

I don't want to speak for Jeff but my CM15X design that he's looking at taking over can use a bootloader which means users can download new firmware via the serial or USB port. It would be possible to supply multiple sets of firmware with various features and let users pick the one that suits them. But this adds to the support burden which is why I don't want to lock Jeff into anything.

He could also sell assembled boards with the main µC just programmed with a bootloader. Users could then get PIC16F88 firmware from anyone who wished to supply it.

While the PIC12F683 in the design can be reprogrammed, it requires a PIC programmer and adapter to reprogram it in circuit which will be beyond the typical user. As I envisioned it, the PIC12F683 would handle RF I/O and manage the RS485 network but would have minimal logic, passing data to the PIC16F88 for decision making. I had planned to store the schedule for reading RS485 modules in the PIC12F683 but everything else would be under the control of the main µC.

I know we've gone over this before, but I am a little slow on this stuff so I am not sure I understand this. If I press:

[05] [06] [ON]

what does the UR24 send via RF? (Right now, it turns on B6, the default housecode). Are you saying that the first button press is just lost in a buffer somewhere? Is this part of what Dan was referring to in the difference between IR and RF codes coming from the UR24?

If that's not practical, what are some other methodologies for accessing all

16 housecodes on the UR24 without having to reprogram the default setting and then change it back?

housecodes,

AUX2 is free, but I want something that's simple. It's sounding more and more like I'm just going to have to live with pressing [X-10] [Setup] a lot more than I want to. :-( It would have been so nice to just enter all commands like:

[08]+[03]+[ON] to turn on H3.

I've got a busload of RF remotes and my wife has even learned to use them. They aren't going to be replaced any time soon for that simple reason! I guess I'll go back to Google and try to find the all-housecode mod to the UR24 that I came across a long time ago - long before I knew I would need it!!!

-- Bobby G.

Diode snipping is something I can do. A dozen eunuched X-10 modules can swear to that. Batteries are NiMH and are swapped out for fresh charged long before they are dead. This sounds like a promising avenue, but IR limits me to line of sight. I'd have to put an IR receiver in every room of the house to match X-10's RF convenience and I don't like making that trade. Dan's escape code technique is looking more and more attractive since most people press the ALL LIGHTS OUT button by accident. Removing it or making it a two-key process wouldn't be much of a hardship.

Is this what you are talking about re: shortcuts?

"Thus if the key is pressed during the initial 36 ms, one transmission is performed. If a key is kept pressed for 108 ms or longer, only leader codes are consecutively transmitted until the key is released."

It appears they do that to save transmission current via what they call the "One-shot Command Transmission Mode." I'm betting it makes decoding much more complicated.

I thought there would be more people using the X-10 remotes to make an all-housecode scheme more attractive a commodity than it's been. Anyone serious about X-10 has long since eaten up a second housecode. Sixteen units isn't enough, especially after the first 8 are gone and the typical RF and Mini controllers get clunky to use. The schemes to operate a multi-housecode home via RF remote aren't cheap or easy. :-( At least not for the electronically-challenged, like me.

-- Bobby G.

You may find some examples on the Adicon Support Forum. If you can't find something to help, I'll code up an example for you when I get a chance.

Jeff

Dave is the expert on how the RF links work. The wired controllers send each digit as it is pressed. That way you can gain the attention of several modules and switch them all with a single ON or OFF.

Apparently, even though the sequence [5] [6] [OFF] is pressed on a UR24, only the [6] [OFF] is transmitted. The palmpads must work that way too because the number & function are combined on 1 button.

To deal with this, it would consume 1 button in the default housecode to access each additional housecode. For example [5] [ON] followed quickly by [6] [ON] could turn housecode E unit 6 on, if that was the mapping you wanted. But there is no reason you couldn't map the first digit to an area of the house, and the second digit to a particular module in that area. The RF translator described in another thread could map any 2 digit pair to any housecode unit pair.

It would be easier if the UR24 transmitted digits as they are pressed, but we will have to work with what they do.

I hope this didn't confuse everybody more.

Jeff

In article , ROBERT snipped-for-privacy@YAH00.COM (Robert Green) writes: | Dan Lanciani and Robert Green wrote: | | > | RF Dude's request is very similar to something I would love to see (and | that | > | I believe can even be implemented using an Ocelot controller). It would | be | > | great to have even a simple TM751-like device that could parse a 3 | "frame" | > | RF command string so that [6] [ENTER] + [12] [ENTER] + [ON] entered | together | > | gets output to the powerline as F12 ON. | >

| > I did something like this with the IR input code of my replacement | > RR501/TM751 firmware: | >

| >

| | "The code accepts X10's standard IR format as used in their remotes and IR | bases. In order to support multiple house codes without requiring custom IR | codes I have introduced an escape mechanism. The escape code is | all-units-off. The first unit code received after an all-units-off command | sets the new default house code (1=A, 2=B, etc.). The initial default house | code is the house code of the base's programmed unit id. To send a real | all-units-off command, follow it with a DIM." | | The escape code mechanism is certainly slick. What are the issues with | doing something similar with RF codes,

There are no issues with RF per se, but the combination of the X10 format RF (combined unit and function) and the user interface of the UR24 probably won't give you a result that is easy to use.

| or would I be best off trying to do | all this with an Ocelot controller?

You mean after the codes have been relayed to the power line? You could translate a sequence of codes from an otherwise unused house code to various used house codes, but I don't think you will like the performance. And you still have the same user interface issues.

| I could have sworn I saw a UR24 mode that put an extra pushbutton on the | case that you pressed to enter a temporary housecode, but I'll be damned if | I can find it now!

That would be useful, but I've never heard of it.

Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com

|

I meant via IR to the Ocelot that can read and process preamble digits from the UR24. But as you and Jeff have noted, if you're willing to give up 1 unit code you can make all the other housecodes fairly easy to access. An entire command then becomes the "preamble" that alerts the custom transceiver that a house code address will be the next one entered.

I'm probably confusing it with something else. It would be nice, though. Maybe I dreamt it. Anyone else have X-10 related dreams? Most of mine are lights that won't come on during some sort of serious crisis.

Thanks for your input, Dan!

-- Bobby G.

Thanks. In searching for that I found the old CPU-XA archives at:

That's where I left off with C-Max. Ladder logic and I don't seem to get along. It feels like it's the bizzaro world of structured programming where everything you know is wrong.

One question, though. Is it going to be possible to do this with an Ocelot via RF through off-the-shelf components? I thought once I went the Ocelot route, I had to use the X-10 remote in the IR, not the RF, mode.

I suppose if I set up housecode F for RF only and then had the Ocelot look at every F code received and translate them into multihousecode commands. That would enable me to use Dan L.'s escape codes to indicate multihouse code commands since the Ocelot would let normal PLC traffic pass and only react to the single RF housecode in a special manner. It would be nice if the Ocelot could read the RF directly, though. Reading the PLC generated by a TM-751 is going to add to the delay. Now I see why all you microcode gurus roll your own transceivers!

-- Bobby G.

Jeff,

I developed a DIY project about a year ago for direct X-10 RF input to a CPU-XA/Ocelot/Leopard, allowing them to treat the RF code as if it were IR. It can handle both standard and security RF since it's just a matter of learning the codes and programming responses. If you want to do something with it I'll try to find my notes.

I would set the remote & your TM-751 to an unused housecode, and have the Ocelot translate X10 commands received on that housecode to what ever you want to control. 2 key sequences can be used to control more than 10 devices.

And yes, it does add some delay. A translator based on either the RR501 or the CM15A mod would avoid the delay.

Jeff

Hi Dave,

That sounds interesting.

I read some time ago that ADI had planned to introduce an RF interface. Maybe that was the one you were working on. The Ocelot has some delay when communicating with modules on the RS485 bus. A RF link using that bus might not be any better than a TM-751 sending the command over the powerline. An IR link directly into the Ocelot would probably offer the fastest response.

I'm having Charter Broadband problems. They say the problem is at their end, but it's taking at 5 to 15 minutes to open a typical web page. So I may not be able to respond again until they get this fixed.

Jeff

ADI has an RF bridge designed for linking locations where hardwiring is not possible. Maybe that's the one you read about.

My design c>I read some time ago that ADI had planned to introduce an RF interface.