| Author |
|
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 18 2009 at 11:57 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi all,
I'm pretty new to this whole thing, so I was curious as to what sort of reaction times people were seeing from their controllers.
When I send a command, lets say for my lights to turn on or off, it can take anywhere from 5-15 seconds for the lights to respond. I'm using Insteon 600w dimmer switches and a PowerLinc V2 USB 2414U Controller.
If this is bad what can I do to speed it up? Are there settings within powerhome that will make this better?
Thanks!
Cruelkix
Edited by cruelkix - January 18 2009 at 11:58
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BeachBum
Super User
Joined: April 11 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: January 18 2009 at 12:07 | IP Logged
|
|
|
When I switch over from a PLC to a PLM my times where 5 times faster. My Insteon off goes almost instantaneous. X10 takes a little longer.
__________________
Pete - X10 Oldie
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 18 2009 at 14:47 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Anyone else have some good ideas that dont involve me replacing my 2414U?
Is this what otherpeople are seeing as common reaction times?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
nadler
Super User
Joined: February 25 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 354
|
| Posted: January 18 2009 at 15:53 | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is not normal response time. I'm using the PLM now
and response time is under 1 sec even from my itouch
through the internet and a router. When I used the PLC
the response time was not much different.
The only thing that slows execution time is if other PH
macros or triggers etc are running. The execution queue
is sequential (with exceptions), so if turning on a
light is your 100th request it will wait until the other
99 are executed and then turn on the light (this is an
over simplification). So that takes time.
I would turn polling off and see if that makes a
difference. I would also look at the execution queue to
see if anything else is running when you issue the
request to turn the light on or off. Also look at the
insteon raw data box and see if the command is going to
the PLC and being received by the PLC for that
particular switch. You can judge the on/off time just
by looking at the raw data. If it's not near instant
then I would switch USB ports and make sure everything
is okay with the PC and the ports.
Let us know how you make out.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 14:44 | IP Logged
|
|
|
nadler wrote:
| Let us know how you make out. |
|
|
THanks for the response Nadler. I siwtched USB ports which seems to have helped. The bigger issue was polling though. It was doing it very often and my commands would wait for polling to finish before it sent the command. So you were right on that one.
The other thing is that it is sending each command 3 times. Is that normal?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
grif091
Super User
Joined: March 26 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1357
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 15:10 | IP Logged
|
|
|
There was a problem on 2.0 and then a different problem on 2.1a that showed up as commands being repeated because PH thought the commands had failed. PH 2.1b should be okay. If you are on 2.1b can you post the event log entries around the 3 tries?
__________________
Lee G
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 15:21 | IP Logged
|
|
|
grif091 wrote:
| There was a problem on 2.0 and then a different problem on 2.1a that showed up as commands being repeated because PH thought the commands had failed. PH 2.1b should be okay. If you are on 2.1b can you post the event log entries around the 3 tries? |
|
|
I'm on 2.1b.
2009-01-20_152147_echolog.txt
Edited by cruelkix - January 20 2009 at 15:47
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 15:22 | IP Logged
|
|
|
2009-01-20 13:21:18.687 TX &nbs p; sendinsteonraw=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 13:21:18.765 RX &nbs p; SENTINSTEON=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 13:21:18.937 RX &nbs p; SENDINSTEONRAW=TRUE
2009-01-20 13:21:21.156 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=05
2009-01-20 13:21:23.687 TX &nbs p; sendinsteonraw=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 13:21:23.703 RX &nbs p; SENTINSTEON=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 13:21:23.984 RX &nbs p; SENDINSTEONRAW=TRUE
2009-01-20 13:21:27.125 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=05
2009-01-20 13:21:28.687 TX &nbs p; sendinsteonraw=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 13:21:28.750 RX &nbs p; SENTINSTEON=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 13:21:28.921 RX &nbs p; SENDINSTEONRAW=TRUE
2009-01-20 13:21:31.250 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=05
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
dhoward
Admin Group
Joined: June 29 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4447
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 15:49 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Definately timing out. The EVENTRAW=05 is the timeout meaning that the device (0E.FD.B8) did not respond. In this case, PH will try 3 times automatically and this will definately cause slowdowns.
So to fix...you've either got a real communication issue or its possible that the PLC/PLM does not have the ID in its internal database. A real quick fix if this is the case is to open the Insteon Explorer and go to the Setup tab. Click "Clear" followed by "Add Min". Retry the command and see if that fixes it.
Dave.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 15:56 | IP Logged
|
|
|
dhoward wrote:
Definately timing out. The EVENTRAW=05 is the timeout meaning that the device (0E.FD.B8) did not respond. In this case, PH will try 3 times automatically and this will definately cause slowdowns.
So to fix...you've either got a real communication issue or its possible that the PLC/PLM does not have the ID in its internal database. A real quick fix if this is the case is to open the Insteon Explorer and go to the Setup tab. Click "Clear" followed by "Add Min". Retry the command and see if that fixes it.
Dave.
|
|
|
Tried that ... no luck. Still getting repeated commands. The first command goes through and the light turns on or off no problem.
Thanks for the quick reply!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BeachBum
Super User
Joined: April 11 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 16:04 | IP Logged
|
|
|
If you have AccessPoints try plugging one into the PLC and another on the same circuit as the switch and see if that helps.
__________________
Pete - X10 Oldie
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 16:06 | IP Logged
|
|
|
BeachBum wrote:
| If you have AccessPoints try plugging one into the PLC and another on the same circuit as the switch and see if that helps. |
|
|
I dont have any access points. Thanks for the thought tho!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
BeachBum
Super User
Joined: April 11 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1880
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 16:15 | IP Logged
|
|
|
What I was trying to isolate was maybe you have a noise issue. Somehow there may be a way to bring the PLC closer to the dimmer. If you have a plug in one it could be tested with it. It’s possible the PLC signal strength is stronger than the dimmer and the status is not being seen by the PLC because the signal maybe absorbed by something.
__________________
Pete - X10 Oldie
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 16:24 | IP Logged
|
|
|
BeachBum wrote:
| What I was trying to isolate was maybe you have a noise issue. Somehow there may be a way to bring the PLC closer to the dimmer. If you have a plug in one it could be tested with it. It’s possible the PLC signal strength is stronger than the dimmer and the status is not being seen by the PLC because the signal maybe absorbed by something. |
|
|
I could install PH on my wife's laptop? then I could plug in much closer to the actual switch I guess. Not sure if that will really help out tho. I'm not really all that far from it as it is.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
grif091
Super User
Joined: March 26 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1357
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 16:34 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Are you using any Insteon coupling devices (SignaLinc)? If the PLM/PLC is on one log of 120 and the switch is on the other log of 120 the physical distance is not really the question. Connect the PLM/PLC to a good extension cord and move the plug point to the same circuit as the switch. If you do not have Access Points or SignaLincs you need to get a pair of Access Points.
__________________
Lee G
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 17:03 | IP Logged
|
|
|
grif091 wrote:
| Are you using any Insteon coupling devices (SignaLinc)? If the PLM/PLC is on one log of 120 and the switch is on the other log of 120 the physical distance is not really the question. Connect the PLM/PLC to a good extension cord and move the plug point to the same circuit as the switch. If you do not have Access Points or SignaLincs you need to get a pair of Access Points. |
|
|
If that were the case why is the switch able to get the signal from the PLC? The light turns on. THe PLC is just not getting information for the switch if I am understanding Dave correctly.
I'll give what you say a try tho.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
grif091
Super User
Joined: March 26 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1357
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 17:21 | IP Logged
|
|
|
Assuming the PLC has the device definition that Dave queried in his initial post, the signal strength of the PLC outbound to the switch may be greater than the signal strength of the switch inbound to the PLC. Also if you have a UPS or other device near the PLC it could be attenuating the inbound signal from the switch to the point that it cannot be recognized. Is this problem recent or is this something that has never worked. Often new Insteon installations have phase coupling problems if either a pair of SignaLincs or Access Points have not be installed. Also it is not uncommon for some PCs and UPSs to be sources of signal attenuation. By moving the plug point of the PLC you get the PLC closer (on the same circuit) as the switch and you move the PLC away from a PC/UPS. This is only a test configuration. Regardless of whether this problem is caused by a lack of phase coupling, installing a pair of Access Points is almost always necessary and it may also be necessary to install a FilterLinc between the PC/UPS and the powerline to prevent signal attenuation. Smarthome has some starter kits that almost give away the Access Points when buying a group of Insteon devices.
__________________
Lee G
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 20:56 | IP Logged
|
|
|
grif091 wrote:
| Assuming the PLC has the device definition that Dave queried in his initial post, the signal strength of the PLC outbound to the switch may be greater than the signal strength of the switch inbound to the PLC. Also if you have a UPS or other device near the PLC it could be attenuating the inbound signal from the switch to the point that it cannot be recognized. Is this problem recent or is this something that has never worked. Often new Insteon installations have phase coupling problems if either a pair of SignaLincs or Access Points have not be installed. Also it is not uncommon for some PCs and UPSs to be sources of signal attenuation. By moving the plug point of the PLC you get the PLC closer (on the same circuit) as the switch and you move the PLC away from a PC/UPS. This is only a test configuration. Regardless of whether this problem is caused by a lack of phase coupling, installing a pair of Access Points is almost always necessary and it may also be necessary to install a FilterLinc between the PC/UPS and the powerline to prevent signal attenuation. Smarthome has some starter kits that almost give away the Access Points when buying a group of Insteon devices. |
|
|
Thanks for the info Grif. This is a brand new install. Just got my first house a few months back and got some Insteon stuff for christmas.
Here is some raw log after I used a big extension cord and moved the PLC to a plug very close to teh switch.
It worked!! But I sitll dont know what the eventraw=3 and 4 mean. I sent 1 on and 1 off command to a swtich.
2009-01-20 18:54:00.546 RX &nbs p; SENTINSTEON=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 11 FF
2009-01-20 18:54:00.781 RX &nbs p; SENDINSTEONRAW=TRUE
2009-01-20 18:54:01.093 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:01.203 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=04
2009-01-20 18:54:01.312 RX &nbs p; RECEIVEINSTEONRAW=04 0E FD B8 0E 12 92 2F 11 FF
2009-01-20 18:54:01.453 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:01.453 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:01.468 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:04.328 TX &nbs p; sendinsteonraw=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 13 00
2009-01-20 18:54:04.421 RX &nbs p; SENTINSTEON=00 00 00 0E FD B8 0F 13 00
2009-01-20 18:54:04.656 RX &nbs p; SENDINSTEONRAW=TRUE
2009-01-20 18:54:04.875 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:05.078 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=04
2009-01-20 18:54:05.093 RX &nbs p; RECEIVEINSTEONRAW=04 0E FD B8 0E 12 92 2F 13 00
2009-01-20 18:54:05.250 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:05.250 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
2009-01-20 18:54:05.250 RX &nbs p; EVENTRAW=03
I guess this means that I do need a pair of access points .... sweet.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
grif091
Super User
Joined: March 26 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1357
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 21:32 | IP Logged
|
|
|
You cannot lose installing Access Points. I have seen posts from some who say they run without 120V leg coupling but the vast majority require it. Plus they act as RF receivers should you want to use a RemoteLinc, Motion Sensor, etc (wireless RF Insteon devices). If you find you are having communication problems after installing the Access Points, (when the PLC is moved back to the computer site) consider installing a FilterLinc, particularly if you have the computer on a UPS.
The 03 event code indicates a duplicate message received by the PLC. As messages move around an Insteon network, being repeated by devices, it is not uncommon for the PLC to receive more than one copy of the same message. The 04 event is an ACK from the switch back to the PLC. You can also tell ACK messages by the 0x2x value in the flag byte of an Insteon message (the 0x2F byte)
__________________
Lee G
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cruelkix
Groupie
Joined: October 08 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: January 20 2009 at 21:44 | IP Logged
|
|
|
grif091 wrote:
You cannot lose installing Access Points. I have seen posts from some who say they run without 120V leg coupling but the vast majority require it. Plus they act as RF receivers should you want to use a RemoteLinc, Motion Sensor, etc (wireless RF Insteon devices). If you find you are having communication problems after installing the Access Points, (when the PLC is moved back to the computer site) consider installing a FilterLinc, particularly if you have the computer on a UPS.
The 03 event code indicates a duplicate message received by the PLC. As messages move around an Insteon network, being repeated by devices, it is not uncommon for the PLC to receive more than one copy of the same message. The 04 event is an ACK from the switch back to the PLC. You can also tell ACK messages by the 0x2x value in the flag byte of an Insteon message (the 0x2F byte) |
|
|
Yeah i'm cool with having to get the access points. My computer does not have an UPS, so thats not an issue. Hopefully I wont NEED a filter linc right now. I wanted them anyway for when I get the thermastat. I just wasnt planning on dropping the money this month. I went ahead and got one of the starter kits with two access points and two lamplincs as those should be fun to play around with in multiple places. This stuff is really damn pricey. I keep telling myself to go slow with it but I keep wanting more :) Thanks for the help!
Edited by cruelkix - January 20 2009 at 22:07
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
PowerHome Messageboard : PowerHome General
Topic: Slow command reaction
