Re: Lynx X-10 Analyzer (WAS Re: Decora HCPRF)

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

> "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >Then, just to see how it would react, I decided to press two keychain
> >remotes simultaneously, one set to housecode "B" and the other set to
"D."
> >Lo and behold!  Now I had a grid the showed the breakout of what the Lynx
> >receiver saw on the powerline, bit by bit, and it showed, embedded in the
> >middle of lots of what it labels "code fragments" was a DIM command for
> >Housecode M, Unit 16.  Bingo!  There's no M housecode in use in my system
> >anywhere.  I'll run a few more tests and even set up a few lamp modules
on
> >the M housecode to see if I can't get it to activate by pressing
> >transmitters on D and A codes.
>
> Can you post the actual powerline bitstream?

I'm going to try to do that when I reload the software onto a different
machine.  So far, all I've been able to do is take limited screen shots that
only show half of the screen (small monitor set to 640 by 480 - should
improve when I change to 1024 by 768).

Since it's a JPG file, it wouldn't be kosher to post them to the newsgroup.
The Lynx SW depends heavily on color and graphics to display the bitstream,
using different forms of shading and different colors to represent various
items.  If I can't figure out how to post them to my Yahoo site so that
others can see them, I'm open to suggestions as to where to post them.

> >I'll bet the Testerlinc suffers from similar issues.  One thing that
freaked
> >me (and Dave, if you are reading, please correct me if I am wrong) is
that I
> >think Dave said they used the Monterey to *calibrate* the ESM1.  How bad
> >could the Monterey be if they use it to calibrate other meters!!!?  :-)
> >FWIW, as soon as I opened the Lynx box, a little voice said "you should
have
> >bought the Monterey or the Testerlinc!"
>
> You're reading more into 'calibrate' than it really means. In this case,
> they merely adjust the ESM1 so that it's fullscale reading is the same as
> the Monterey fullscale reading. Now both are in error by more than 50%
> whereas the initial ESM1 shows the true peak-to-peak level.

I'm a little confused (well maybe more than a little).  Do both meters now
NOT read peak-to-peak and only peak to baseline?

> There is one benefit in that it may let you see weaker signals than
before.

I'm assuming that's merely the side effect of expanding the scale.

--
Bobby G.