apostolakisl

Turn the fanlinc on high, then pull the string on the fan until it goes to full speed.

It depends on how much you want. If you just need a short run, I would go to HD/Lowe's/similar and have a piece cut to length. If you need 500 feet or something, then I would look at places like Monoprice since I bet it would save a lot of money. I get my cat6 from them and have always been very happy with them. I have never bought thermostat wire from them.

The only way I can reproduce a situation where a program is listed as 1) True 2) Last finish time precedes last run time Is By altering the program while it was running and saving it. All other means of interrupting a running program and will update the finish time. I tested 1) using "stop" command while running 2) "disabling" program while running 3) causing the folder status to turn "false" while running My conclusion: Either ISY firmware has a bug that somehow your program is uniquely exploiting, or you are altering/saving the program while it is running. I suppose your console could also have lost sync with ISY, but that seems unlikely based on the status of other programs. CORRECTION: In an earlier post, I stated that saving a program doesn't trigger or change the status of a program. It does appear to change the status of a program if the status is indeed different than before the save, but it does not trigger the program.

No, that is not true. The program being true occurs when the last execution of the program ran the "then" clause. Saving a program is not a trigger and does not itself force an evaluation of the "if" clause nor does it change the status from prior to the save. Again, your program being true means the "then" ran. If it did not finish running, you either "stopped" the program or the folder it was in turned false while it was running. EDIT: I suppose you could also have disabled the program while it was running then re-enabled it to get rid of the red slash. EDIT 2: And I am very much on board with OberKC. What the heck difference does it make after you save the program from the admin console. That would only matter if you are constantly saving it from the admin console. Which would make no sense. You write a good program, save it, then you don't touch it anymore. EDIT3: Just look at the program summary page. It tells you the last start time, the last finish time, and the outcome (true or false). If the start time and finish time are the same number of seconds apart that your wait is, then the program did finish and did do the stuff after the wait. Your problem as to why your stuff after the wait isn't the way you expect it lies with some other situation that is changing them after that.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree here. Situation. Program last ran true, but it would appear that the then clause didn't finish. Causes 1) The program was "stopped" during the wait 2) The folder it is in was disabled during the wait There are no other ways I know of for a program to abort a running then and not be "false" Those 2 are easy to rule out. That leaves with the possibility that your items after the wait did execute, but some other program or action undid those changes. Check your program summary page and you can see last time program was triggered, whether it was true or false, and what time it finished. If the finish time is the correct amount of seconds after the trigger time, then it did work. Something else prevented the changes after the wait from happening or the did happen and got undone before you checked.

You can also press and hold the up paddle on the non-load switch and that will bring both switches up to full brightness as per your ramp rate speed.

That was a mistake. You probably didn't talk to them after they acknowledged the problem. I got every single one of my switches replaced under warranty which also got me the newer firmware and a few added features. Unfortunately this was prior to dual band. Since the installing the new switches, maybe 5 years ago, no problems at all (except PLM). I suppose you could try getting all those switches that you had to fix yourself replaced if you make a big enough stink. Really and truly, calling smarthome was very hit or miss. Sometimes I would get someone who was lovely and accommodating, other times I got a brick wall.

You can use global cache to do it. REST commands go to it and it outputs the IR codes.

You could always fix your old plm per the instructions on the forum.

I bet you have lots of fluorescent lights with noisy ballasts. That is probably your com issue. If all your lights are on one or two circuit breakers, consider putting a filter on that entire circuit. X10 has filters for that purpose which are very cheap and work just fine for Insteon. Of course, any circuit you filter will also filter out Insteon signals, so you can't have Insteon devices plugged in (although you could use dual band devices and rely on the rf comm). EDIT: and the other thing is that in a commercial complex you may have 3 phase power. You need to have comm bridges between the three phases, or use dual band devices.

I have also seen it on occasion. I really don't know what causes the rare and seemingly random incorrect execution of this type of program. I would speculate that it is related to the issues you mentioned. Perhaps a second instance of the "control off" makes its way around the network and hits the ISY after it has updated the status to off. It could also be that the ISY missed the last event on the device and has the device incorrectly labeled as off even though it is on.

Only if you have an Else clause. But I don't think you would ever have an Else clause for this program, at least not the way I use them. I have lots of these programs. I use them as in bedrooms and bathrooms with a then statement to turn the light on to 15%. This is really nice when you get up at night to go to the bathroom it is an easy way to turn the light on just a little when you want to keep your brain as nearly asleep as possible. Anyway, I can tell you that these programs had issues after some previous firmware updates where they would execute a Then statement when you turned the light off from an on state (the light would first turn off, then a split second later come back up to 15%). I posted that as a bug and it was corrected. So,the "order of operations" is apparently just barely the way it is and modifications to the firmware can tip it the other way if missed.

It appears that Crestron has more than one system. I was under the impression that crestron hard wired (the line voltage, not a control wire) every device back to a control panel . . . meaning that once installed you pretty much were hosed if you didn't like it. This is what my friend had who sold the house because he hated it so much. I think this is the classic Crestron system. They also have a low voltage control wire solution where the AC is wired mostly like normal but LV control wires go to all the fixtures/switches. This seems like it could be easily undone, but can only be installed if you have the walls open. Finally it looks like they also have a "z-wave" solution. https://www.crestron.com/downloads/pdf/product_misc/dg_lighting_120v_277v.pdf

The problem with Crestron, as I understand, is you can't rip it out. Insteon, Zwave, or similar systems simply require replacing the fancy switch with a regular switch. And I know your pain with Insteon hardware in the early days. However, they did end up warranty covering everything. That didn't change the PITA of the whole thing, but the current hardware seems to be very reliable. The only current issue as far as I know is under-rated capacitors on the PLM (which many of us simply replaced ourselves).

Are you adverse to using a program to do this? There will be a lag of maybe up to 1 second, but a program can do exactly what you want. If control switch 1 is turned on Then set switch 2 off If control switch 1 is turned off Then set switch 2 on As mentioned, there isn't a way to do what you want with pure Insteon linking. You simply can't have an off command from switch 1 turn switch 2 on using linking. EDIT: If you linked the 2 switches with switch 1 as a controller and switch 2 as a responder with an on level set to 0%, that would accomplish program 1. Then use program 2 to do the opposite. There should be enough lag on program 2 that even though the linking is shutting the switch off (pushing off on switch 1 will send and off command to switch 2), that switch 2 should turn on. You'll have to play with it but it would probably work.

Minimum 25 watt device. Well that pretty much eliminates any led fixture, unless you have 3 or 4 lights on the fixture. I think Insteon uses a little more than .01 watts unless something has change since I last checked. My recollection is that it is more like .7 watts, but maybe the newer models are better. Not sure how any reasonable person is going to justify spending that kind of cash on Crestron when there are so many other choices out there now that are capable of working just as well at maybe 5% (or less) of the price. Furthermore the "poor man" brands are feverishly integrating with all the other regular "poor man" stuff that we all own.

I'm sure some Crestron systems are just great. But a client of mine bought a house with Crestron . .. and sold it BECAUSE of Crestron. He Hated it. He said it constantly had issues and it was so damn locked down that you couldn't do anything to it. And when it went down, he was literally in the dark. It cost him hundreds of dollars in labor for the guy just to show up and, like waiting for the cable guy, was a huge inconvenience. I suspect Crestron days are numbered as the quality of the competition has vastly improved in the last 10 years. And the options/functionality/connectivity of the competition is past Crestron and racing forward at mach speed.

If your trying to get a scheduled recording on a foscam to record with audio. . . you can't. At least you can't on my model and I think that this is the case across the board. I had to use a PC and a 3rd party software to record with sound on a schedule. It will record with audio on a motion alarm, but the longest you can set a motion alarm to record for is 5 minutes.

Everyone should have a 120vac plug behind their washer/dryer since the washer requires one. The alarm system contactor on the flapper door/io linc won't require any fuses or any "messing with dangerous stuff" at all. You would be using it as intended, to detect an open/closed door. It would not run the risk of voiding any warranties and probably would be one of the easiest to install.

This is the same thing as wrapping a small wire around one of the conductors, it is just a commercial version of the home made version. At least with my dryer, you don't need to do anything to install one of these since the dryer plug wire was installed in the dryer such that there is about 2 inches of individual conductor accessible where the outer jacket was stripped back further than what ended up being contained inside the hook-up box of the dryer.

Depending on how it is put together, you might not be able to do it without cracking a warranty seal.

Either way, you can use a standard alarm system door contactor regardless of whether the dryer vent and flapper is ferrous or not. Standard door contactors work just fine on steel doors. It's just a matter of proper mounting.

If you have a gas dryer, just use a standard synchrolinc. What you are referring to is a sail switch. They make them for hvac systems. They cost about $40 and would require some creative mounting.

That's not what I was thinking. I was thinking running the coil wire to an IO linc input directly. It is looking for 5vdc to trip it (and it warns not to exceed 5v, I'm thinking 2 or 3 volts might be enough). I had an entirely different idea which may be better yet. Run a wire out your dryer vent to the outside where the flapper is. Put a standard alarm system magnetic reed switch. When it opens, dryer is running, closed dryer is off. Plus added bonus, if it fails to close, you know your flapper need cleaning.

It absolutely will work, they only question is how many turns around the wire it takes. You would need a bridge rectifier.