Help! PLM malfunction??

[yardman 49]

Well, after playing with X10 last night, this morning I tried to add my hall KPL and two togglelincs to the ISY. Big problems right away:

 

When an Insteon device is added, or a device is turned on or off, I will usually get an error message stating that "Cannot Communicate with (device code). Please check connections."

 

Sometimes the communication will actually go through. In fact, usually the lights I'm controlling will indeed go on and off. But it seems as though the return communication is not occuring.

 

Well, the result is now that my existing links on the KPL and dimmers were indeed overwritten (including previous scenes programmed to buttons). But now I keep getting these errors.

 

Troubleshooting I did:

- I removed the APC serial surge suppressor = no help.

- I turned off my computer firewall (just in case) = no help.

- I tried different outlets in my office for the PLM. Also tried one in the hallway = no help. Just for background info: my current PLC running Houselinc in in my office, and does not have these problems.

- I unplugged my existing Houselinc PLC = no help

- I power cycled the ISY and PLM = no help.

 

So I'm kind of out of options. Questions:

- Is it possible that the PLM that I received is defective, and is causing these problems?

- Is the tranmitter/receiver on the PLM the same as the PLC, so that I should expect the same level of performance?

- Is the ISY possibly bad? Kind of doubt this, but is there a way to check?

 

Thanks

[Mark Sanctuary]

Sounds like an Insteon communication issue; do you have any Signalincs or Accesspoints installed in your setup?

[yardman 49]

Mark:

 

Yes, I do. I have Access points. The Insteon portion of my network if very solid.

 

All my Insteon stuff worked just fine, controlling through a PLC in my office. But not through the ISY/PLM.

[Mark Sanctuary]

Oh I did not notice you said PLC. There are most likely two things going on here; an Insteon communication issue and your PLC is disrupting your PLM.

 

If you have a 5.2 PLM then you will most likely have to have your Accesspoints plugged in directly on top of the PLM. The new 5.2 PLM has about 50% of the signal strength as the 4a PLMs so it does not reach out very far on its own.

 

Your PLC is most likely not playing nice with your PLM. The PLC tends to dirty up the network and the PLM can’t deal with it. What you might do is remove the PLC from your network and then try doing “File --> Restore Devices†from the ISY. Your device links are most likely incomplete because, of the communication issue not letting them program correctly.

[MikeB]

Try plugging one of your AccessPoints onto the back of the PLM to improve signal communications in and out.

[yardman 49]

Try plugging one of your AccessPoints onto the back of the PLM to improve signal communications in and out.

 

No, that does not help at all. I didn't think that it would. As I previously stated, my PLC works just fine with all Insteon signals from the same outlets.

[Mark Sanctuary]

It does not really matter if you’re networked well before because when adding new devices it changes the dynamics of your whole network. The 5.2 PLM is a finicky little guy.

 

You’re going to have to remove the PLC, and re-setup you’re Accesspoints with one on top of the PLM, and the other on an apposing power phase. Then re-program your devices with the ISY.

 

Lots of other users have gone thru exactly what you are now and the end of the story it was communication issues and PLC garbage. Setting up the ISY and PLM may be difficult at times but once you get it running you won’t look back.

 

If you just can’t get it working I suggest you give Michel a call and he will walk you thru the difficulties.

[yardman 49]

Thanks, Mark. I needed some encouragement. I also just spoke to Michel, and he was very helpful.

 

I'll let you all know what happens.

 

 

Thanks

[sloop]

my 2 favorite troubleshooting actions

 

watching the plm annoying little blue/white led for activity when a command is sent

 

opening the console and monitoring for error messages - they are a little cryptic, but meaningful to the isy nerdlincs - anytime i have the gui display an error, the console usually has a message

 

(the one with the c=[15] or somesuch message with the [15] in it - means the plm has gone craplinc on you and needs to be unplugged and plugged back in)

[yardman 49]

Mark wrote:

 

It does not really matter if you’re networked well before because when adding new devices it changes the dynamics of your whole network. The 5.2 PLM is a finicky little guy.

 

You’re going to have to remove the PLC, and re-setup you’re Accesspoints with one on top of the PLM, and the other on an apposing power phase. Then re-program your devices with the ISY.

 

Lots of other users have gone thru exactly what you are now and the end of the story it was communication issues and PLC garbage.

 

I was thinking about your reply, Mark, and I now want to know why the PLM behaves differently than the PLC? I know of users that have claimed that they have multiple PLCs on their network with no ill effects.

 

Michel told me that the current PLM has way less signal power than other Insteon devices (even the PLC?). Based on previous posts, I thought that the PLM and PLC were pretty close in design, but it now appears to me that this is not really the case, and that the PLM is much more "finicky" than the PLC. Would you agree??

 

Thanks

[Mark Sanctuary]

Yes, the PLM is still the new guy on the block and is getting many firmware updates these days.

[upstatemike]

...The new 5.2 PLM has about 50% of the signal strength as the 4a PLMs so it does not reach out very far on its own...

 

 

So what was the logic behind this design change?

[Mark Sanctuary]

Dude, you got me. Michel keeps telling me with a smile, that would be a good question for submitting over at the techmall forum.

[Michel Kohanim]

Hello All,

 

We all know that the PLMs have some issues but SmartHome has been very helpful in addressing them, coming up with quick fixes, and providing the means to test them without having to go through myriads of paperwork.

 

The reason the PLMs have less power is because the original versions got really warm. PLMs version 52 and above do not have that issue. Furthermore, PLMs version 56 and have (still in Beta but very promising) do not have the 'I am tired symptom' and thus much less "communications error" and much more efficient.

 

slooplinc!

 

Everytime I read your posts I LOL!

 

Thanks and with kind regards,

Michel

[mdcastle]

So does 56 still have the low output power problem or is that fixed since it is more efficient?

 

I kind of get the feeling the standard Smarthome "white brick" form factor has become an issue for them as they never got the PLC to run in standalone mode with the funtionality the market expects, and now having to throttle back the PLM power because of heat buildup.

[aLf]

Is it just possible, maybe just maybe that SH is pissed off at UDI and your success of ISY and their failed HouseLinc? I find it VERY frustrating that the piece of the puzzle that your company needs, THE PLM is flawed! Michel, can you guys build your own PLM? Maybe we all can help with Venture Capital. This sucks!

[Mark Sanctuary]

I stand by the 5.2 PLM, it is a good product, it just needs hearing-aids.

[Michel Kohanim]

aLf,

 

I really don't think so! But, thank you so very much!

 

Things will get better shortly since we are working together to make sure the next revisions perform better.

 

Mark,

 

You are funny!

 

With kind regards,

Michel

[Michel Kohanim]

mdcastle,

 

The power output is the same but handling traffic has improved and thus a lot less lock ups under heavy traffic.

 

With kind regards,

Michel

 

So does 56 still have the low output power problem or is that fixed since it is more efficient?

 

I kind of get the feeling the standard Smarthome "white brick" form factor has become an issue for them as they never got the PLC to run in standalone mode with the funtionality the market expects, and now having to throttle back the PLM power because of heat buildup.

[yardman 49]

mdcastle,

 

The power output is the same but handling traffic has improved and thus a lot less lock ups under heavy traffic.

 

With kind regards,

Michel

 

So does 56 still have the low output power problem or is that fixed since it is more efficient?

 

I kind of get the feeling the standard Smarthome "white brick" form factor has become an issue for them as they never got the PLC to run in standalone mode with the funtionality the market expects, and now having to throttle back the PLM power because of heat buildup.

 

Wow. No return to a higher output signal? Well, I hope that signal handling alone will help. To use one of Sloop's terms, this is a real "bummerlinc".

 

Again, I'm a little mystified, and I'm hoping to hear back from SteveL as to what is the difference (in terms of transmitter/receiver) between the PLM and the PLC. My PLCs work just fine! If they need more room in the PLM case for a heat sink, they should just remove the pass through outlet and use that space.

 

One of the big improvements regarding the Insteon protocol was supposed to be reliability. Most of us that have been using Insteon and X10 are aware that sometimes you need to put filters on noisy devices. But once you do have your whole house working well with Insteon, adding more Insteon devices doesn't usually cause a problem, as they all "add" to the reliability of the signal.

 

So why should they have designed the PLM any differently? Why should the PLM be the weak link? I'd be willing to spend twice as much on the PLM to get one that works well.

[rowland]

Actually, since a PLM is not field upgradable to new firmware versions, I think it's all a marketing plot on the part of SH to sell more PLMs to people who have already own a PLM.

[MikeB]

Funny thing is with any of these powerline technologies is how everyone's experiences & setups differ so much.

 

At the moment, I have an X10 RF transceiver, X10 powerline interface, a PLC, and 2 PLMs all on the same circuit - separate by about 20 feet of romex - and my ISY-26 is very reliable. I'm not currently using my PLC or 2nd PLM, but I would think even having them plugged in might cause issues. I do have an AccessPoint piggybacked onto my ISY-26's PLM, however.

[yardman 49]

Funny thing is with any of these powerline technologies is how everyone's experiences & setups differ so much.

 

At the moment, I have an X10 RF transceiver, X10 powerline interface, a PLC, and 2 PLMs all on the same circuit - separate by about 20 feet of romex - and my ISY-26 is very reliable. I'm not currently using my PLC or 2nd PLM, but I would think even having them plugged in might cause issues. I do have an AccessPoint piggybacked onto my ISY-26's PLM, however.

 

MikeB: what version PLM do you have?

 

Thanks

[Mark Sanctuary]

Actually, since a PLM is not field upgradable to new firmware versions, I think it's all a marketing plot on the part of SH to sell more PLMs to people who have already own a PLM.

 

It may not be field upgradeable but Smarthome will let you swap it out for an upgraded one at no charge over and over again as new firmwares come out.

[MikeB]

MikeB: what version PLM do you have?

 

I have a 4A PLM I use (or will use) for CQC, and a 52 PLM for the ISY-26.

 

The circuit these are all on is protected by GFI (since they're in an unfinished basement), which is another thing I've seen a couple people say cause problems. Go figure.