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

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"BruceR" <brNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

> Mark my words. You will end up buying the ACT 004.  You seem serious
> about having the ability to really see what's going on with your
> installation and you want to be able to do so from anywhere in the
> house. IOW, you're like me (at least in that regard).

We're beginning to own a lot of the same test equipment, that's for sure!
:-)  I've even thought that the ESM1's are cheap enough to use as sensors at
the breaker panel and the far ends of the longest branches.  If any one of
three starting showing signal loss, I'd not only know about it, I could
vector in on it.  As much as I can, I try to keep tracking of what gets
plugged into the AC outlets, but it's not always possible with other
technologically-inclined family members around.  It seems to me that
someone's got a mod to turn old appliance modules with bad cams into remote
signal strength sensors.  To me that status of the powerline is almost like
the house's pulse.

Dave, if you're reading this, do you know how much distance there can be
between the ESM1 wall wart and the meter assembly?  Would it be possible to
mount the wall wart at the breaker panel and cut the wires from the meter
head to the PS and splice a very long cable in between so that the wallwart
sits in the basement and the LED display is mounted so I can see it from my
desk?  Somewhere I read that the distance might be critical, but I can't
seem to find that message again in Google.

> The TesterLinc is
> tempting but I don't think it's going to be "satisfying" in telling you
> what you want to know. Consider biting the bullet... most places will
> give you a 30 day return privilege (some exclude test equipment for
> obvious reasons).

The TesterLinc lost its luster when Dave pointed out it came with a rather
large tail.  I don't like the "units" approach to signal measurement when
there's already a pretty good standard to use: volts.  I suppose I could
mount the interface and an extension cord along with the TesterLinc in a
larger box, but that's pretty kludgy.

The ACT unit's ability to read 220V could be a big plus in my next house.
Even the Monterey can't do that.   I wish either the ACT or the Monterey had
a USB links.  Then my choice would be simple! Sometimes you can learn an
awful lot from stored logs.  Taking and saving a snapshot each quarter would
reveal an overall system degradation you might never notice otherwise.

I should be cleaning out the grill for the holiday but here I am fiddling
with Lynx and the newly arrived OmniLT.  This stuff is just too much fun.
The puzzle for today is how to switch over from a leased ADT unit to the
OmniLT with the least amount of disruption.  I was thinking of reusing ADT's
old door switches and sensors, but the only way to really stay protected
24x7 is by getting the LT operational on all its own sensors.  Then I can
use the ADT stuff as backup or HA sensors once I'm sure the LT has worked
out.

--
Bobby G.

> From:Robert Green
> ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx
>
> > "BruceR" <brNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >
> >> You're heading down the same tester path I took.
> >
> > I'm beginning to notice that!
> >
> >> The TesterLinc at $89 is probably too good to pass up.
> >> The "quality" level it reports is interesting but I like to
> >> see what's happening. The Monterey is certainly a good
> >>  unit but when there's a problem it reports lots of
> >> "BSC" (Bad Start Code) messages when that's not really the problem.
> >
> > I'll probably end up with the Testerlinc, too, because it's a lot
> > easier to justify than the Monterey and seems to be remarkably
> > similar as well.  The Lynx is not practical for moving around much.
> > In fact, my plans to run it on an old laptop were not well-reasoned.
> > The software looks as if it would run best on a very large display.
> > Also, when I went to check it just now, it was flashing the screen on
> > and off, with a WIN32 message about a parameter problem.  Not a good
> > sign.  I'm going to try it on another machine.
> >
> >> I think that's the same issue Dave pointed out.  The ACT 004 not only
> >> provides accurate readings but can test 220 volt lines if you need to
> >> (using a different plug in power connector) and also has a transmit
> >> function with selective signal output levels.
> >
> > That's something I've needed on several occasions  I can fake it with
> > a neat pair of spring clips that can keep a transmit button on a
> > minicontroller mashed down and a surge protector that's known to
> > attenuate the signal by 1volt.  But the ACT looks far classier.
> >
> >>  I haven't really needed to log data to a PC to shoot trouble so
> >> that's not part of my criteria.
> >
> > It shouldn't really be part of mine, but I'd like to be able to port
> > the information I discover to a format that's postable on the web.
> > I'm not sure what I am doing will come to anything, but I can't help
> > wondering if some housecodes are more prone to colliding than others.
> > There have been so many strange reports here over the years it's
> > almost like CHA's own version of UFO sightings.  Having the ability
> > to transfer readings to messages will make it easier to get feedback
> > from the CHA brain trust.  I lost a lot of banked SAF with the
> > "Hawkeyes in every room" experiment.  It was pretty nightmarish
> > having the wrong lights turn on while the right lights wouldn't.
> >
> >>  See: http://www.act-solutions.com/PCCSpecFrame.htm for a spec sheet
> >> and here's where the manual is found:
> >>  http://www.act-solutions.com/PCCInstFrame.htm  Click on AT004 on
> >> these pages. CAUTION: I think a read of the manual might get you
> >> diving into the seat cushions looking for spare change to add to
> >> your tester budget!
> >
> > Thanks for the citations.  Well, there's a website selling Leviton DHC
> > rocker switches 5 for $100.  That's a savings of $250!! Just enough
> > to buy the meter!!!
> >
> > The ACT004's a nice unit, but the Testerlinc might satisfy my tester
> > needs better if used along with the Lynx unit (if I ever get it
> > working
> > correctly - time to RTFM).
> >
> > Thanks for your input, Bruce
> >
> > --
> > Bobby G.
>
>