oberkc

I must admit that I am not feeling overly ambitious about spending the time it would take me (I am sometimes a little slow) to try to sort through all this, but one thing that jumps out at me is that, within a given program, you have a lot of conditions based upon a single device (kitchen - downstairs). I also subscribe to the theory that computers are not generally susceptible to random occurrences. More likely, there is a program that is incorrect. I offer a couple of thoughts on the first program condition: Status 'Downstairs - Kitchen' is Off <---what is the purpose of this, given the next condition? And Status 'Downstairs - Kitchen' < 1% <---what is the purpose of this one? What about using "NOT ON"? And ( Control 'Downstairs - Kitchen' is switched Off Or Control 'Downstairs - Kitchen' is switched Fast Off ) ) Or ( Status 'Downstairs - Kitchen' is 100% And Status 'Downstairs - Kitchen' > 99% <--what is this purpose, given the condition above And Control 'Downstairs - Kitchen' is switched On ) Or Control 'Downstairs - Kitchen' is switched Fast On And $SB_DN_Kitchen_OnOff is 0 My gut reaction is that you have created a bit of an overly complicated mess. I also wonder, given your original requirements, whether your kitchen light is on a dimmer or relay. I am also a little suspicious that this condition, overall, is working in ways you are not expecting. Let's suppose that the kitchen light is at 50% and you turn it off. The status would change, forcing an evaluation of the first two conditions. You have also received a CONTROL OFF from that switch. I expect this program to evaluate TRUE. Is this what you want? I would start from scratch. My suspicion is that your set of conditions might be best met with an integer (non triggering) variable , where: variable = 1 means kitchen light is on variable - 0 means kitchen light is off Perhaps create a single program (kitchen assumed relay, ON/OFF only): if status downstairs kitchen is not off then set variable = 1 else set variable = 0 I would re-write the condition of the first program: if variable = 0 and ( control downstairs kitchen light is off or control downstairs kitchen light is fast off ) or variable = 1 and ( control downstairs kitchen light is switched on or control downstairs kitchen light is switched fast on ) then .... else ... Maybe a few of these thought can help stir the thought processes.

My understanding is the same as vyrolan...the folders in which one can organize devices is purely cosmetic. The reference you often see to "group" commands is used by those who get a bit deeper into the insteon signals. When those folks use "group", the rest of us should be thinking "scene". Part of the need to differentiate such terms is because the ISY introduces a command that is not available to those without a controller: a direct command. The terminology can sometimes cause confusion. But, I don't believe the organizational folders has any relationship to group commands. Be sure, however, that your "groups" are not, in fact, "scenes". Once created, the only way to identify the difference is the little icon. One looks like a file folder. The other looks like something else (circle around three smaller circles).

I vaguely recall a while back when these types of requests were posted in the "product request" forums. Equally vague are my memories where I thought the response was that such a feature was "on the list". If mfranzel does not clarify further, let me add my input... a) first (or second...seventh) day of the month first (or second/third/fourth) wednesday (or thursday or monday) of the month. c) specific date every year If one wanted to get fancy, how about a specific day each year relative to fall and spring equinox, and summer/winter solstace (probably asking too much, huh?) or to be able to define holidays. I suspect that, with these variables as potential input conditions, we could create a combination of conditions to meet darn near any need.

Without trying to define your requirements for you, or to assume your needs are more nuanced than indicated, I offer the following concepts as ideas from which you can elaborate and ponder further. Specific details would depend on what scenes you have already, and which devices you want to go off configure your KPL button as "non-toggle off" create a program such as: if control KPL button is turned off then turn off all applicable scenes turn off any other devices that were not included in the scenes turn on any applicable scenes turn on additional device that were not included in the scenes else nothing Are you currently doing this with scenes only, or are programs involved?

Yes, there is some flexibility, I recall. Certain days of the week are possible. In the program setting, I think there is a check box: daily. If unchecked, it will give a daily selection. I believe a specific date is also possible. I do not believe one can choose a certain month or day of the month or day of the year, however.

I don't know if this is wrong or right, but it is how I do it. If you want to check whether one, or more, lights within a set of light is on, then : if light 1 is on or light 2 is on or light 3 is on ... Seems like proper logic to me. Yes, it can be a bit tedious. Unfortunately, I do not believe there is anything in the insteon construct which is equivalent to "any of the lights in this scene are on". Therefore, one has to create this with programs and logic. Perhaps it would be more useful to post the one that does NOT work. It is often helpful, also, to further eleaborate on "won't work". Often times, there are unspoken-but-not-obvious expectations about how programs are supposed to behave. Computers have the nasty habits of doing EXACTLY what we tell them (nothing more, nothing less), rather than what we want. For the KPL buttons to go off, you would have to tell them to go off. How did you set up your "all lights" button to cause the office lights and hallway lights to go off? Is this button controller of a scene with the affected lights? Are you using a program? Did you include the KPL buttons in that scene or program?

I understand that all -994 will have a slot where one can add the Z-wave module, when available.

I understand that, to save power, battery-operated devices do no listen for commands and do not respond to scene commands from other linked devices. A remotelink cannot 'reflect' the status of another device. I expect what you desire to achieve is doable with a program, but you may have to depend on factors other than remotelinc status to get it done.

I suspect a factory reset will keep whatever version of software currently residing on the ISY.

I have never used Z-wave, but my impression was that compatibility of one device with another could sometimes vary by manufacturer. To see the wiki state support for "appliance modules" "thermostats", etc...flies counter to my perception that support would need to be more specific. If the Z-wave radio in the ISY is compatible with all thermostats, all slage locksets, all appliance modules, and all lamp dimmers, this would be HUGE.

Xathros, Up until now, I thought we were told that support for Z-wave devices would be limited (at least initially). It appeared to me that early emphasis was on locksets. Is it your perception so far that the Z-wave capability of the ISY is universally compatible with all (or most) z-wave devices, or only certain ones?

The z-wave module for the -994 is barely out (or perhaps not even yet) in trial versions. I doubt there are many who have been down this path.

Configuration of which device? PLM? ISY? I have insteon devices that go back about 5 years and newest less than a couple of months. Never have I noticed an issue with any device being unable to be used in my system. All appears to continue to communicate. Perhaps if there was a really old PLM that did not support that v2 insteon protocol, one could have a problem. Otherwise, my personal practice is to not worry about such things.

I do what bsobel does, with the same results. I would do this with a scene, rather than a program. Add all the devices that fall into the set of "all" (those that you want to go off when you press one of the two buttons) as responders. In addition, add the two "ALL OFF" buttons to the scene, as controllers. Configure the buttons to be in non-toggle off mode. From then on, each time you press one of the two buttons, everything will turn off.

If I may make another observation, you may also benefit from a scene. If you were to create a scene (giving the name of you choice) that includes the family room and kitchen lights, as responders, with 55% on levels each, then your program could be even more simplified. It might even be more responsive. if time if from sunset + 45min for 2 hours then set scene on else set scene off

The major decision you need to make is whether you want your remotelinc in 4-scene or 8-scene mode. In four scene mode, buton C and D are the ON and OFF buttons for the same scene. In eight scene mode, button C and D control different scenes, toggling between ON and OFF. Is this your current "upstairs on" scene? Responding to button C? I will assume this is the case. Is this your "upstairs off" scene? Responding to button D? I will assume this is the case. Unfortunately, I am unfamiliar with using the ISY with a thermostat. What do you observe when you turn the thermostat ON versus OFF? Are there adjustable ON settings (50%, for example) is it just ON and OFF? If you are willing to configure your remotelinc into "8-button, non-toggle (always on)" mode, the best solution in my mind is to use scenes to control what you want, and make the respective remotelinc button controller of your two scenes scene. Of course, it is possible that your intended use for the other buttons makes this configuration unworkable. If you must leave your remotelinc in 4-button mode (C=on, D=off), the I would approach this problem with two programs? The first program, in pseudo code: if control buttonc-d is turned on then set "upstairs on" to on else Second program if control buttonc-d is turned off then set "upstairs off" to on else You could also try this with a single program such as if status buttonc-d is on then set "upstairs on" to on else set "upstairs off" to on This second approach may work, but I hesitate to predict, being concerned with what happens if the button is neither fully on, or fully off. Try it, however. It is not overly complicated. Beware, too, that I understand pressing and holding keypad buttons sends not an ON or OFF command, but a BRIGHT or DIM command. These programs may not respond to this. Also, a FAST ON/OFF is also possible, to which these programs may not respond.

OK. This tends to suggest that the ISY is seeing the command from the remotelinc. I misunderstood your original statement. No problem. This tends to suggest a potential problem with your programs. OK. This does not sound good to me. When your press the remotelinc ON button, program one will run the "then" path (turn "upstairs on" fast on) and program 2 will run the "else" path (turn "upstairs off" fast off). If you have common devices in both scenes, it is hard to predict which statement will win out. Perhaps the better approach here is to describe what it is you are trying to do, and what response to various button presses you are trying to generate. What do you want to happen in response to an ON command? To an OFF? Good. For now.

The status, as displayed in the ISY admin panel, does not change in response to button presses? This suggests to me that the ISY is not hearing the command, for some reason. How confident are you that you are within range of an access point or other dual-band device, and that you have access points on both legs of your electrical system, and that the PLM can hear all the devices? Regarding your programs, one thing that concerns me about your programs is the possibility that the scenes "upstairs on" and "upstairs off" include some of the same devices. Is this the case? If so, I suspect your two programs are giving conflicting direction to these common devices. Another question: is your remotelinc button a controller of either of those two scenes? I am not confident that changing "status" to "control" will solve your problem, but I might not fully understand yet, what your problem is.

simonw, I have nowhere near the modules you have. My only one is the X-10. Assuming the general concept is the same, I can tell you that it was painless for me. I asked for my module to be transferred. Once done, I plugged in the -994, and into the PLM and network. Updated the firmware to the latest (which you have already done), restored my system from a backup (which you have already done), and I was running. The downtime was the time it took to plug things in. I don't recall, but I may have had to reload the little icon app that finds and opens the new ISY, but that was pretty trivial. I found the whole process to be the most pain free technology transfer I have ever experienced. My experience with phone, reader, tablet, operating system, routers, computers, streamers, and all that has made me a bit gun shy regarding change. If your experience is like mine, just do it.

Personally, I think I would maintain a double box. This give you more flexibility for future considerations, should it be necessary to pull out a keypad. I believe there are available double plates with a blank half. Regarding which insteon switch to control a fanlinc, I would go with 6-button KPL. Use the "main" button for lights, and use buttons a/b/c/d for off/slow/medium/full fan speeds.

xathros, thanks. I vaguely recalled that there was a way, but had never spent the brain cells trying to research it, or figure it out.

Like LeeG, I don't believe this is possible. I would certainly like to know if I am wrong. That is how I do it. I once thought there was, but have never been able to find this ability. Thinking about it, I don't know that this even makes sense. Since a given controller can be controller only of one scene, copying a scene could violate that basic insteon tenet.

yes, it is. I was just trying to avoid sounding too confident.

I understand and agree. Our example, however, has two "things" in the condition section, one of which is triggered by ON. The individual "NOT" condition would be evaluated as "TRUE" when the combined program conditions were triggered based upon receipt of an ON command. Perhaps another way to attempt to make a point, similar to a truth table: condition A: control x is switched on (triggered by ON) condition B: control x is not switched off (trigger by OFF) tigger conditionA conditionB AorB AandB ON TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE OFF FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE In the end, whether you use AND or OR makes no difference in this case.

Normally, I would agree. Perhaps a better way of putting it is that both conditions could never be TRIGGERED at the same time. Your second condition (not off), however, is always true by default at any point that the program is triggered, except that split second point in time upon receipt of an OFF command. So, if an ON command is recieved, BOTH conditions are true, because it DID recieve an ON command, and because it simultaneously DID NOT recieved an OFF. It is starting to sound a lot like a double-negative. My head hurts.