What I've learned about Schlage Locks and Z-Wave

[Irakandjii]

3 hours ago, stusviews said:

I have several programs that sequentially lock all three Schlage locks on various schedules (2 deadbolts, 1 lever) with no delays/waits between program statements. Like lilyoyo1, all run successfully, no error messages. Even the two programs that unlock both the lever and deadbolt. They, too, are trouble-free. And yes, I do have repeaters.

Too, I don't see anything that pertains specifically to locks in the .pdf linked to.

Just to be clear, I did not state the pdf had specifics for locks.  I apologize if folks misunderstood my intent.   So to clarify.

The only unique requirement for locks, as specified in their documentation, is:

• the (nearest neighbor) meaning  first device in the internal routing table  must support:
  1. Secure Connections (Included in Gen 5 devices, but generally requires special set-up.  Earlier devices may not support!)
  2. Beaming (part of the z-Wave standard so generally included in current devices that are hardwired, or plugged in.)

After the above conditions are met the network topology (robustness) is the only significant factor.  

Z-Wave networks are subject to potential "weirdness",  because the data packets are carried in a "potentially noisy and congested" RF band.  This may result in: odd patterns of signal degradation, random interference,  packet collisions, reflections, energy sinks etc. all of which may defy simplistic explanation  Most folks cannot afford the RF diagnostic equipment to isolate and correct these aberrations .  In such technological "darkness", I believe that knowledge is your best beacon ..   

I included the z-Wave technical information PDF to provide folks with a more complete framework to understand the network protocol and topology in general.  It is important to have an  appropriate layout (both number and position) of nodes between your devices and the ISY (your topology).   The two (2) documents I have posted in this thread should help folks with that.   

It is possible to solve mesh network connectivity problems by saturating the service area with z-Wave nodes.  Simply add more devices over the applicable area.  There is a caution however, if applied in an unguided fashion.  By way of example, the following problems may arise  

• Devices stop communicating, too many hops (routing uncertainty). 
• Increased delays or lag (transport latency)
• Increased probability of choke points in the network (See PDF's for examples)
• Increased costs with no net benefit.  (Idle or stranded nodes)  

The "worst case" cost function of a mesh networks like z-Wave is a multiple of "range" squared so if you double the range from the center costs increase by 4, triple the range and it is times 8 and so on.  

I trust this helps some folks.

 

[lilyoyo1]

14 minutes ago, Irakandjii said:

Just to be clear, I did not state the pdf had specifics for locks.  I apologize if folks misunderstood my intent.   So to clarify.

The only unique requirement for locks, as specified in their documentation, is:

• the (nearest neighbor) meaning  first device in the internal routing table  must support:
  1. Secure Connections (Included in Gen 5 devices, but generally requires special set-up.  Earlier devices may not support!)
  2. Beaming (part of the z-Wave standard so generally included in current devices that are hardwired, or plugged in.)

After the above conditions are met the network topology (robustness) is the only significant factor.  

Z-Wave networks are subject to potential "weirdness",  because the data packets are carried in a "potentially noisy and congested" RF band.  This may result in: odd patterns of signal degradation, random interference,  packet collisions, reflections, energy sinks etc. all of which may defy simplistic explanation  Most folks cannot afford the RF diagnostic equipment to isolate and correct these aberrations .  In such technological "darkness", I believe that knowledge is your best beacon ..   

I included the z-Wave technical information PDF to provide folks with a more complete framework to understand the network protocol and topology in general.  It is important to have an  appropriate layout (both number and position) of nodes between your devices and the ISY (your topology).   The two (2) documents I have posted in this thread should help folks with that.   

It is possible to solve mesh network connectivity problems by saturating the service area with z-Wave nodes.  Simply add more devices over the applicable area.  There is a caution however, if applied in an unguided fashion.  By way of example, the following problems may arise  

• Devices stop communicating, too many hops (routing uncertainty). 
• Increased delays or lag (transport latency)
• Increased probability of choke points in the network (See PDF's for examples)
• Increased costs with no net benefit.  (Idle or stranded nodes)  

The "worst case" cost function of a mesh networks like z-Wave is a multiple of "range" squared so if you double the range from the center costs increase by 4, triple the range and it is times 8 and so on.  

I trust this helps some folks.

 

It's hard to oversaturate a standard zwave install. Zwave in itself can handle over 200 nodes. At those greater numbers you run a risk but having a low number (even more than what you need) is highly unlikely to cause issues. The network heal makes each zwave device aware of each other and it is then that they figure out their path. The self healing nature of zwave also plays a part in limiting hops and collisions due to routing. With that said, if you are constantly polling devices this can add unnecessary communication on the network which can then impact even smaller systems. The only issue with added more devices would be the money spent on the devices. This pain can be somewhat negated by getting dual use devices such as outlet, lamp/appliance modules, and switches. 

When it comes to small installs (especially when it comes to locks), it's most important to have a strong network than the unlikely event of to many hops. 

[Jason Miller]

I have a 4 year old home automation system. All using the ISY 994i which I just recently added the z-wave module. All firmware is up to date, etc. I added the Schlage lock and it works perfectly. Only thing I didn't like was Alexa wouldn't unlock it. So, I had to make a program and say "Alexa, turn on unlock front door" to bypass that limitation.

I created a blog and video on my setup here: https://jamz.net/schlage-connect-smart-lock-universal-devices-alexa/

[stusviews]

Alexa doesn't include unlocking because it's a security risk. For example, if you have a window open for whatever reason, then it'd be real easy to tell Alexa to unlock the door. If you manually create a program to unlock any door then you are already aware or should be of the risk that poses.

[asbril]

Today I successfully installed and included a Schlage Connect lock into my Son's ISY.

Question 1 :  Can I  write a program whereby User X can only open lock on specific days ?

Question 2 : Is it normal that the battery shows 91 % an hour after the installation ? In other words, what is the average duration of the batteries ?

 

Thanks

[stusviews]

Did you install the portal and Alexa V3 skill. If so, then the skill has "open" built into it, so I doubt you can prevent that from happening. The duration depends, of course, on usage, so there's no average that will apply. A new install can show nearly any high percentage. setting the lock up uses a lot more energy than use does.

BTW, as I always unlock the door when I'm leaving, I don't normally use voice for that purpose because it doesn't use the battery. In fact, I rarely use voice to unlock at all. More important to us is to ensure that the locks are locked. A program does that, lest we forget. We also keep a tiny light on in the bedroom that indicates if a lock is not locked.

It's a candelabra bulb in a little lampd most easily seen from bed. An Echo device near the bed allows us to voice lock all the locks.

Edit: you could probably write a program to immediately lock the door if it's unlocked on a "secure" day.

[asbril]

4 minutes ago, stusviews said:

Did you install the portal and Alexa V3 skill. If so, then the skill has "open" built into it, so I doubt you can prevent that from happening. The duration depends, of course, on usage, so there's no average that will apply. A new install can show nearly any high percentage. setting the lock up uses a lot more energy than use does.

BTW, as I always unlock the door when I'm leaving, I don't normally use voice for that purpose because it doesn't use the battery. In fact, I rarely use voice to unlock at all. More important to us is to ensure that the locks are locked. A program does that, lest we forget. We also keep a tiny light on in the bedroom that indicates if a lock is not locked.

It's a candelabra bulb in a little lampd most easily seen from bed. An Echo device near the bed allows us to voice lock all the locks.

Thanks Stu, No my Son has no Alexa.  He has Google Home but this has not yet been linked to his brand new ISY (with Portal) . I guess that you are right in that the initial setup of the lock uses a lot of the battery power. I believe that there is an option to automatic re-lock after unlocking and I will activate that option.

I still want to find out whether I can make a program so that User X can only have access on specific days.

[wdhille]

I have minimal control on my Schlage locks, but I am only using the ISY and their web interface. My batteries, after 10 weeks are at 97%.

Wayne

[stusviews]

A difficulty that we've encountered with the auto-lock feature is when we want to leave the door open (screen door closed). If one forgets that the door locks automatically (not uncommon), then when the door is swung closed, the dead bolt is protruding and hits against the door frame. Then the door needs to be unlocked and pushed closed. It may also leave an unsightly mark.

Or if we spend some time in the yard and the door is closed, we need to unlock it to gain entry. Although easy, it does require tapping the Schlage button and entering the entry code.

So, instead of auto-locking, we simply single-tap a button when we leave.

[asbril]

24 minutes ago, stusviews said:

A difficulty that we've encountered with the auto-lock feature is when we want to leave the door open (screen door closed). If one forgets that the door locks automatically (not uncommon), then when the door is swung closed, the dead bolt is protruding and hits against the door frame. Then the door needs to be unlocked and pushed closed. It may also leave an unsightly mark.

Or if we spend some time in the yard and the door is closed, we need to unlock it to gain entry. Although easy, it does require tapping the Schlage button and entering the entry code.

So, instead of auto-locking, we simply single-tap a button when we leave.

That makes total sense but in my Son's case, it is a condo and the Schlage is on the front door. I believe that in his case, the autolock feature would be useful.

[lilyoyo1]

A hidden door sensor can be incorporated to determine whether the door is open or closed. It can then be incorporated into programs that will help prevent the door from locking while open. Since you're using zwave, Aeotech makes one that can be used.

[Irakandjii]

I checked the BE 469 parameters (attachment below) and it appears there is no way to change user codes or status via Z-Wave using parameters..  I will keep looking though.  I thought I saw a command sequence a few weeks ago to establish and remove user codes.  Who knows it might have been a senior moment.  SEE BELOW

You can activate or turn off Vacation mode.  See this video by Schlage https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Schlage+Connect+BE+469+z-wave+vacation+mode&mkt=en-ca&httpsmsn=1&refig=badb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98&sp=-1&pq=schlage+connect+be+469+z-wave+vacation+mode&sc=0-43&qs=n&sk=&cvid=badb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dSchlage%2bConnect%2bBE%2b469%2bz-wave%2bvacation%2bmode%26form%3dEDNTHT%26mkt%3den-ca%26httpsmsn%3d1%26refig%3dbadb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98%26sp%3d-1%26pq%3dschlage%2bconnect%2bbe%2b469%2bz-wave%2bvacation%2bmode%26sc%3d0-43%26qs%3dn%26sk%3d%26cvid%3dbadb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=17E6A1E4C50245B65D9617E6A1E4C50245B65D96&FORM=WRVORC

This is an all or nothing solution that turns all user codes on/off.  If off you must use your key.  This could be programed using ISY schedules and logic like normal.  And send the parameter 0x04 to set to appropriate mode.

UPDATE: I found the reference I was looking for.  https://community.smartthings.com/t/release-lock-manager/63022 This is a smart things app that manages user codes remotely.  It uses a special device manager for the lock.  I need to look at ISY and see if it supports these abilities yet, otherwise there may be additional programming that the ISY devs need to do.

UDATE 2: 

1. The Vacation mode setting for the BE 469 appears as an option in the Schlage Lock (Using firmware 5.12) so it should be settable by the ISY, I have not tried it.
2. I cannot see a simple method to manage user codes in the new 5.12 console and firmware.  When I have time I will look at the code smarthings uses and see how it is done, there may be some clues there.  But for now it appears that only the vacation workaround exists.

 

Schlage Deadbolt Parameters.pdf

[asbril]

1 hour ago, Irakandjii said:

I checked the BE 469 parameters (attachment below) and it appears there is no way to change user codes or status via Z-Wave using parameters..  I will keep looking though.  I thought I saw a command sequence a few weeks ago to establish and remove user codes.  Who knows it might have been a senior moment.  SEE BELOW

You can activate or turn off Vacation mode.  See this video by Schlage https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Schlage+Connect+BE+469+z-wave+vacation+mode&mkt=en-ca&httpsmsn=1&refig=badb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98&sp=-1&pq=schlage+connect+be+469+z-wave+vacation+mode&sc=0-43&qs=n&sk=&cvid=badb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dSchlage%2bConnect%2bBE%2b469%2bz-wave%2bvacation%2bmode%26form%3dEDNTHT%26mkt%3den-ca%26httpsmsn%3d1%26refig%3dbadb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98%26sp%3d-1%26pq%3dschlage%2bconnect%2bbe%2b469%2bz-wave%2bvacation%2bmode%26sc%3d0-43%26qs%3dn%26sk%3d%26cvid%3dbadb5a8990674c65c0d22191860fbf98&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=17E6A1E4C50245B65D9617E6A1E4C50245B65D96&FORM=WRVORC

This is an all or nothing solution that turns all user codes on/off.  If off you must use your key.  This could be programed using ISY schedules and logic like normal.  And send the parameter 0x04 to set to appropriate mode.

UPDATE: I found the reference I was looking for.  https://community.smartthings.com/t/release-lock-manager/63022 This is a smart things app that manages user codes remotely.  It uses a special device manager for the lock.  I need to look at ISY and see if it supports these abilities yet, otherwise there may be additional programming that the ISY devs need to do.

UDATE 2: 

1. The Vacation mode setting for the BE 469 appears as an option in the Schlage Lock (Using firmware 5.12) so it should be settable by the ISY, I have not tried it.
2. I cannot see a simple method to manage user codes in the new 5.12 console and firmware.  When I have time I will look at the code smarthings uses and see how it is done, there may be some clues there.  But for now it appears that only the vacation workaround exists.

 

Schlage Deadbolt Parameters.pdf

Many thanks for this detailed response. I look forward hearing about your experience with Lock Manager.  It appears that it gives an option for selected access, but I wait your comment re compatibility with ISY.

[nwchicago]

On 2/18/2018 at 6:54 PM, wdhille said:

KSchex:  Sounds like you have it figured out. I think at least part of my problem is (was) that I don't want to build out a large Z-Wave mesh network just to control my locks. I've got a very robust network with my UDI devices...  But I do want the Z-Wave locks to work, and one is about 90 feet away. So if I just had the ISY and one lock, I'd want gain antennas pointing to each other and be done with it. But... my four locks are all over the place, so I needed to add some repeaters (Inovelli) for the first and second hop. I really wanted to put my ISY in the basement next to Cisco ASA and POE switch, but then Z-Wave ran out of hops before it got to the shop. So right now, things seem happy (which means I'm happy!) and the ISY is physically in the middle of the four locks, with two off in one direction and two off in another. And I ended up with three repeaters, which finally work. 

I've thought about the comments that external Z-Wave antennas don't improve network performance. I can see that if you have and want a robust Z-Wave mesh network with lots of devices. You don't then want the ISY talking directly to each device, so you want a weak signal that only hits the first devices and does not interfere with the ones at max range. 

Good luck,

Wayne

I was in exactly the same boat - a bunch of zwave locsk and no range to communicate.  I added aeotech zwave sirens - 4+ and they make all the difference.

I purchased a six foot extension cable that I use to connect zwave devices and hold them close to my isy when i do a secure add - makes it alot easier.

the double-click within 1 second is not easy, but it can be done.  i always try to look at the log to see if it occured.

i am now adding more zwave content - plugged in - a few appliance controllers (ge / jasc), aeotech 6in1 sensor.  I would like to add some zwave gas detectors - am hoping they can support encryption.  very limited options for that category.

 

chicago

[nwchicago]

On 3/5/2018 at 9:27 PM, lilyoyo1 said:

A hidden door sensor can be incorporated to determine whether the door is open or closed. It can then be incorporated into programs that will help prevent the door from locking while open. Since you're using zwave, Aeotech makes one that can be used.

I've used the insteon hidden door connector.  They work pretty well.

insteon batter powered devices seem more responsive / faster than zwave devices.

Has anyone created an approach that prevents a schlage door from locking while it is open?

When I called schlage support they said you cannot change the autolock duration or function via zwave (which sucks).

Any thoughts?

thanks.

chicago

 

ps i'm still on 4.6.2 and probably missing all the cool new zwave content - when does 5 go into production?

[Bumbershoot]

1 hour ago, nwchicago said:

ps i'm still on 4.6.2 and probably missing all the cool new zwave content - when does 5 go into production?

Read this, and you'll never ask that question again!

[lilyoyo1]

3 hours ago, nwchicago said:

I've used the insteon hidden door connector.  They work pretty well.

insteon batter powered devices seem more responsive / faster than zwave devices.

Has anyone created an approach that prevents a schlage door from locking while it is open?

When I called schlage support they said you cannot change the autolock duration or function via zwave (which sucks).

Any thoughts?

thanks.

chicago

 

ps i'm still on 4.6.2 and probably missing all the cool new zwave content - when does 5 go into production?

I agree with you about Insteons speed compared to  zwave. Insteon would work as well. However, since he was using zwave, the zwave would work better since he already has a mesh setup. 

I would actually turn off the auto lock feature and simply auto-lock the doors via a program.

If you want to auto-lock the door you could say:

If status door is unlocked and door sensor is off

Wait 30 seconds lock door

[johnstonf]

On 3/11/2018 at 4:47 PM, lilyoyo1 said:

I agree with you about Insteons speed compared to  zwave. Insteon would work as well. However, since he was using zwave, the zwave would work better since he already has a mesh setup. 

I would actually turn off the auto lock feature and simply auto-lock the doors via a program.

If you want to auto-lock the door you could say:

If status door is unlocked and door sensor is off

Wait 30 seconds lock door

I have had a Kwikset lock for couple of years now, and i just lock with a program "if open for 10 minutes... lock".  It works great, and rarely do i have any issues... only when the door is just open a fraction, and the lock continually tries to lock.  I also created a program that, if i run it, will unlock the door, and disable the auto-lock for 2 hours.  That way, if I know a bunch of people are coming, etc, i just run it, and in 2 hours, it goes back to normal 10 minutes. The 10-minute is usually enough, say we're going out to grab the mail, or whatever.  If we want, we open the door wide, and it autolocks even though not closed.   Then when done, just manually put the bolt back in, and close the door, and in 10 minutes, it locks again.  Just one of many ways to do it, but KISS is what I aim for if possible.  (80/20 rule... 20% effort and $, 80% payback).

[lilyoyo1]

3 hours ago, johnstonf said:

I have had a Kwikset lock for couple of years now, and i just lock with a program "if open for 10 minutes... lock".  It works great, and rarely do i have any issues... only when the door is just open a fraction, and the lock continually tries to lock.  I also created a program that, if i run it, will unlock the door, and disable the auto-lock for 2 hours.  That way, if I know a bunch of people are coming, etc, i just run it, and in 2 hours, it goes back to normal 10 minutes. The 10-minute is usually enough, say we're going out to grab the mail, or whatever.  If we want, we open the door wide, and it autolocks even though not closed.   Then when done, just manually put the bolt back in, and close the door, and in 10 minutes, it locks again.  Just one of many ways to do it, but KISS is what I aim for if possible.  (80/20 rule... 20% effort and $, 80% payback).

I would use a sensor on the door and include it in your program. That way the door doesn't auto lock whole open.

[johnstonf]

On 3/17/2018 at 1:43 PM, lilyoyo1 said:

I would use a sensor on the door and include it in your program. That way the door doesn't auto lock whole open.

for me it happens soooo infrequently, and when it does, it's just a matter of flip, close, lock, done... so until it becomes annoying, i'll spend $ on other fun stuff...

 

 

[arw01]

Been following this topic closely.  Picked up a pair of Schlage BE469 off Amazon  a few weeks back and have them installed.  These are the only locks and only zwave I have.

The house has aluminum siding, the doors are steel covered foam filled standard BORG type doors.

ISY is sitting on concrete in the basement.

Buy the UDI zwave dongle for the ISY994i I have now.

Will those two locks talk with each other, or do I need to plug something in close to each to start working on getting a signal to the ISY?
     Want to first know if they locked or not locked

     second to be able to lock them reliably

[asbril]

As has been mentioned several times, Zwave locks work best when part of a wider Zwave mesh network. It is not optimal to add Zwave locks to an otherwise Insteon network, even adding a couple of repeaters.

[lilyoyo1]

22 minutes ago, asbril said:

As has been mentioned several times, Zwave locks work best when part of a wider Zwave mesh network. It is not optimal to add Zwave locks to an otherwise Insteon network, even adding a couple of repeaters.

It's not optimal to run with Insteon? Both work flawlessly together without issue as long as you  invest in building a proper mesh network for both protocols. 

48 minutes ago, arw01 said:

Been following this topic closely.  Picked up a pair of Schlage BE469 off Amazon  a few weeks back and have them installed.  These are the only locks and only zwave I have.

The house has aluminum siding, the doors are steel covered foam filled standard BORG type doors.

ISY is sitting on concrete in the basement.

Buy the UDI zwave dongle for the ISY994i I have now.

Will those two locks talk with each other, or do I need to plug something in close to each to start working on getting a signal to the ISY?
     Want to first know if they locked or not locked

     second to be able to lock them reliably

If you read through this posting, and many others from recent times, you will see what others have gone through when not investing in building a proper network. 

[asbril]

4 minutes ago, lilyoyo1 said:

It's not optimal to run with Insteon? Both work flawlessly together without issue as long as you  invest in building a proper mesh network for both protocols. 

Of course you can run both Insteon and Zwave networks. It is just not optimum to add a Zwave lock with just Zwave repeaters as network.

[lilyoyo1]

13 minutes ago, asbril said:

Of course you can run both Insteon and Zwave networks. It is just not optimum to add a Zwave lock with just Zwave repeaters as network.

I'm still not understanding. Any hardwired zwave device repeats as do full fledged repeaters. Many have simply found certain devices work better than the full blown repeaters. Insteon has nothing to do with the strength of one's zwave devices or zwave communication.

The important part is making sure a person fully invests in building a strong mesh network. A person can use the Aeotech siren (highly recommended), outlets that support beaming (least efficient but cleanest look) or plug in modules such as the Aeotech Smartswitch 6. As long as there is a strong mesh network for zwave, there will be no issues.