ToggleLinc Dimmer - Failed Writing

[cranrob]

I'm just starting out with Insteon. I have an ISY994i running 3.2.6.

I am having problems with one of my ToggleLinc Dimmers (v.41).

 

This is what the Event Viewer says in Level 3 while doing a "write updates":

 

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:30 PM : [1D 5 1B 1 ] Link 0 : 0FF8 [A20019BCCEFF1F01] Writing [A20019BCCEFF1F01]

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:30 PM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:30 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:39 PM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:40 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:48 PM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:48 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 02:25:52 PM : [1D 5 1B 1 ] Link 0 : 0FF8 [A20019BCCEFF1F01] *Failed Writing [A20019BCCEFF1F01]

 

I either end up with a red "!" or a green arrow with "1011" on my device tree.

 

What's going on?

[LeeG]

cranrob

 

Thanks for the event trace data. It shows the device did not respond to the Extended format link database commands which are trying to write a link record (no inbound 02 50 or 02 51 messages in trace). I would expect that some Standard format messages worked to get to this point. Not responding to Extended messages can be the result of using the old SignaLinc RF couplers (with the black external antenna) which do not support Extended messages. Could also be an inventory of older I1 devices installed that do not repeat Extended messages. One solution is to install a Dual Band device on the same circuit as the TriggerLinc to allow Access Points (assuming there are Access Points) to relay RF signals onto the powerline at the TriggerLinc location.

[cranrob]

I'm not using any RF couplers. Powerline only. There are 4 Insteon devices on the same circuit - 3 ToggleLincs and 1 KeypadLinc. The other 3 are responding correctly.

[Vyrolan]

I'm not using any RF couplers. Powerline only. There are 4 Insteon devices on the same circuit - 3 ToggleLincs and 1 KeypadLinc. The other 3 are responding correctly.

I think LeeG misread "ToggleLinc" as "TriggerLinc".

 

Is the PLM on this same circuit too? Is it closer/further to the other devices that are working? If it's on a different circuit, are they on the same phase? Is the non-working device far from the breaker box? (For that, just trace the logical path out from the breaker box...is the non-working one further from the breaker...and the working ones closer to the breaker...that could mean noise or something is the problem.) What is the load on the ToggleLinc? You could also try just manually set button linking the ToggleLinc to one of your other devices...just to prove it can communicate and link to something.

[cranrob]

The PLM is on a different circuit but the same phase.

The devices are all the same "distance" from the PLM (on the same circuit coming from electrical panel).

The load is a small chandelier with 4 40-watt incandescent bulbs.

 

I just unlinked the ToggleLinc and did a factory reset, then added it back to the ISY, and that failed.

So I did a restore and write updates, and got this:

 

 

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:14 PM : [ 1D 5 1B 1] Preparing Device 'LR Rear Chandelier' for Restore

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:14 PM : [ 1D 5 1B 1] Device 'LR Rear Chandelier' ready for Full Restore

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:14 PM : [All ] Writing 0 bytes to devices

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:22 PM : [iNST-TX-I1 ] 02 62 1D 05 1B 0F 0D 00

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 0F 0D 00 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [iNST-SRX ] 02 50 1D.05.1B 19.BC.CE 23 0D 02 (02)

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [standard-Direct Ack][1D.05.1B-->ISY/PLM Group=0] Max Hops=3, Hops Left=0

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [1D 5 1B 0 ] Calibrating engine version

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [1D 5 1B 1 ] Link 0 : 0FF8 [A20019BCCEFF1F01] Writing [A20019BCCEFF1F01]

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:23 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:32 PM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:32 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:41 PM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:41 PM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Fri 12/21/2012 04:39:45 PM : [1D 5 1B 1 ] Link 0 : 0FF8 [A20019BCCEFF1F01] *Failed Writing [A20019BCCEFF1F01]

[LeeG]

I understood these are ToggleLincs. The second trace shows the same problem except it has a Standard format message in the trace which does have a device response, the Extended format messages used to write the link records do not get any 02 50 or 02 51 inbound message from the ToggleLinc. The ISY sends the commands three times, marking the device with a Red ! or Green update pending Icon when the three attempts get no response from the device.

[LeeG]

"The PLM is on a different circuit but the same phase."

 

Without Dual Band devices to run the 4 tap Set button test how was it determine the PLM is on the same phase as the device circuit?

[cranrob]

The circuit breaker for each circuit is on the same side of the electrical panel.

[LeeG]

I was afraid of something like that. Phases are not split between left side and right side. They alternate breakers vertically

 

Left side

 

Phase A

Phase B

Phase A

Phase B

Phase A

and so on

 

The breakers alternate phases on the right side as well.

 

Also are there other electronic devices on the same circuit as the PLM. Any power strips. The PLM should be plugged directly into an outlet and other electronic equipment and power strips should be isolated with FilterLinc(s)

[cranrob]

You learn something new every day! I will move the PLM to the other phase and see if that makes a difference.

There is nothing else on the circuit with the PLM. Thanks!

[cranrob]

Nope, no difference:

 

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:36 AM : [1D 5 1B 1 ] Link 0 : 0FF8 [A20019BCCEFF1F01] Writing [A20019BCCEFF1F01]

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:36 AM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:36 AM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:45 AM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:45 AM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:54 AM : [iNST-TX-I2CS] 02 62 1D 05 1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:54 AM : [iNST-ACK ] 02 62 1D.05.1B 1F 2F 00 00 02 0F FF 08 A2 00 19 BC CE FF 1F 01 55 06 (00)

Mon 12/24/2012 11:27:58 AM : [1D 5 1B 1 ] Link 0 : 0FF8 [A20019BCCEFF1F01] *Failed Writing [A20019BCCEFF1F01]

 

So do I have a bad device?

[LeeG]

Always possible but I put it low on the possibility list. Simple test will verify. Connect the device to an appliance cord (plug on one end, bare wires on the other), plugging the appliance cord into the same circuit as the PLM. If it works there the powerline at its current location is suspect. The fact that the device responded to Standard commands strongly suggests the device is fine.

[cranrob]

Here's an update: Things are just getting weirder and weirder.

 

The ToggleLinc started responding to commands properly, but another ToggleLinc started exhibiting the same problems.

 

So, I tried an experiment - let me explain my current set-up:

 

I have an ISY994i connected to a EZIComm Insteon PLM. I have 2 access points on opposite phases (and near each other).

I have a 4-gang switch box containing 3 ToggleLincs and 1 6-button KPL.

The entire 4-gang switch box is served by a single circuit breaker. The loads are all incandescent. (2 chandeliers, and 2 sets of pot lights).

I have a box of other Insteon devices ready to install, but I want to get this stuff working first, and I'm getting very discouraged.

 

This is what I found: If I "air-gap" all but one of the Insteon devices, the ISY communicates fine with the non air-gapped one.

"Air-gapping" 2 of them also seems to work. But with 3 or 4 active devices, I start to see these communication problems, and the problem seems to "roam" among the devices. Another thing I've found: If I remove a device from the ISY, factory reset it, then add it back, it usually works fine, but then another device starts to fail.

 

If I understand things correctly, the Insteon devices repeat any commands they receive on both powerline and RF. If this is true, since they are all on the same circuit and in very close proximity to each other, I find it hard to believe that some devices are receiving the signal and other's aren't (especially since the problem seems to "roam" among the devices in the box).

 

My only conclusion is that I have multiple defective Insteon devices, a defective PLM, or the Insteon Communications Protocol is completely screwed up.

 

Any thoughts?

[cranrob]

A couple of other pieces of information, if it matters:

 

- I upgraded the ISY to 3.3.8

- I have several X10 devices on the network, controlled by the ISY, which all work fine (I am attempting to convert from X10 to Insteon)

- I have tried the PLM in several different locations - currently plugged into an outlet immediately adjacent to the electrical panel.

[oberkc]

My only conclusion is that I have multiple defective Insteon devices, a defective PLM, or the Insteon Communications Protocol is completely screwed up

 

I would tend to discount the first and third conclusions. Barring something like a lighting strike or power surge, multiple, simultaneous failures is unlikely. Regarding third conclusion, too many people have working insteon systems.

 

Often, link records in individual devices can get messed up. My suggestion would to try to "restore device" via the ISY. As I understand it, this will make the device links match what the ISY thinks it should have.

 

Ahead of that, you can perform a device compare, to see if there are mismatched records.

 

Both options are available (if my memory is correct) under tools, or by right-clicking a single device and choosing via menu.

[cranrob]

 

Often, link records in individual devices can get messed up. My suggestion would to try to "restore device" via the ISY. As I understand it, this will make the device links match what the ISY thinks it should have.

 

Ahead of that, you can perform a device compare, to see if there are mismatched records.

 

Both options are available (if my memory is correct) under tools, or by right-clicking a single device and choosing via menu.

 

I've done restores multiple times. It works with devices that are reliably communicating, but not with ones which are not communicating well.

I've done device compares too. I can get links from devices that are reliably communicating, but cannot from the ones that are not communicating well.

Again, the problem seems to "roam" among the devices. And again, they are on the same circuit from the electrical panel.

[arw01]

I would find the outlet closet to these switches and make sure it's on the same breaker. I would then run an extension cord or just move the ISY for a few minutes to this outlet.

 

Try all the programming again with event level 3 and watch the hop counts to make sure there is no devices having to repeat the messages.

 

This solved a problem I have with some older switches that just would not program reliably, and even with an access point they failed 90% of the time to take programming. I put the PLM into the outlet that the switches get their power from (yeah bad electrician years back), and they program licky split never a problem!

 

Alan

[cranrob]

I shouldn't have to do that - if even one device on the circuit is getting commands reliably, the others should be as well (due to the fact they are on the same circuit, and the other devices on the circuit repeat the command). I find it interesting that when I "air-gap" a couple of the devices, the active ones behave correctly. I believe this points to interference being produced by the devices themselves.

[LeeG]

cranrob

 

I suspect that communication is marginal all the time. Symptoms are changing as the load on that circuit changes.

 

Some basic things first. Make sure the PLM is plugged directly into an outlet, no multiple plug cord as they may have noise suppression which attenuates the Insteon signal at the source. Anything else plugged into the PLM circuit should be on a FilterLinc, UPS, PC, Laptop, Modem, Router, etc.

 

Run Tools | Diagnostics | Event Viewer at LEVEL 3. With one ToggleLinc active, others air gapped, use the Admin Console to turn On/Off the ToggleLinc at least 5 times. Then add power to another ToggleLinc and turn it On/Off with the Admin Console at least 5 times. Add power to the third and turn it On/Off at least 5 times. Post the event trace. I suspect a problem with communication even when things appear to function. With Insteon retries built into the protocol what appears to work from visual observations may not be correct from a command execution perspective.

 

Note that none of the ToggleLincs are Dual Band.

[cranrob]

I will try that tonight and post here. Thanks.

[oberkc]

I shouldn't have to do that

 

Agreed. Unfortunately, troubleshooting sometimes requires extraordinary measures.

 

if even one device on the circuit is getting commands reliably, the others should be as well

 

I would not assume that this is ALWAYS true...just more likely.

 

I find it interesting that when I "air-gap" a couple of the devices, the active ones behave correctly. I believe this points to interference being produced by the devices themselves.

 

I find that interesting, as well. Not quite sure what to conclude from this.

[Vyrolan]

I find it interesting that when I "air-gap" a couple of the devices, the active ones behave correctly. I believe this points to interference being produced by the devices themselves.

 

I find that interesting, as well. Not quite sure what to conclude from this.

It's definitely true that Insteon devices themselves are signal absorbers. In theory that is all resolved by the repeating they do...but if the signal is barely reaching that box (or set of boxes potentially) on the last hop (already been repeated the maximum number of times), only one device may be able to read it before the signal is too degraded. Since it was the last hop, the one that read it doesn't repeat it. So pulling the air gap on that one would make the next one work. In that scenario, the real problem is that your signal is taking max hops to get to there and is really weak when it does.

[IndyMike]

I agree with Vyrolan that Insteon devices themselves are significant signal absorbers. A worst case scenario is a "cluster" of devices at the end of a long circuit. For comparison, I've run up to 5 devices "clustered" at the end of 250' of romex. This was in the absence of noise (filtered circuit) and signal levels were marginal (~50mv) but the units communicated reliably.

 

Since Insteon devices repeat transmissions, they function far better if the are "distributed" over long runs. This maintains the signal level.

 

Unless you have an extremely long run and noise on the circuit, I would submit that you have a signal absorber elsewhere on the circuit. I'm not sure if there are duplex receptacles between your devices and the panel. If there are, you could try boosting the signal level mid-stream by installing a lamplinc or other plug-in repeater.

[TJF1960]

I find it interesting that when I "air-gap" a couple of the devices, the active ones behave correctly. I believe this points to interference being produced by the devices themselves.

Is it possible the OP has 1 or more Switchlinc v.35 in his system? I scanned thru the thread but didn't see any reference to devices he has. Seems to me there were intermittent issues with that version of SL which could seriously affect communications for other devices. Wondering if by chance the devices he is air-gapping might be of that version?

[LeeG]

Thanks for the reminder bu I do not think SwitchLincs are involved. This dialog started on the Smarthome forum with ToggleLincs as the starting point. OP wants to get the ToggleLincs stable before moving on to other Insteon devices. It may be that that the worst part of the Insteon install turns out to be the starting point.