Re: I think they've done it again.

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"bruceR" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

> FWIW, perhaps I should mention here that the "flickering" - at least in my
> case - is a very brief (guessing 100ms twice) brightening of a dimmed load
> rather than going dim or dark.

That's pretty interesting.  It does lend support to the theory that it's the
Insteon signal itself getting through to the triac and causing it to trigger
when it shouldn't.

Your comment is also a good reminder that the devil's always in the details.
Flickering, at least in my mind, means dimming from a known brightness level
and then a return to that level.  I know that it really means "variations in
light level" and was probably first used to describe candle light but when
applied to electrical lights, it seems to imply "loss of light."  All along,
though, we've been seeing reports of "flashing, popping, brightening and,
IIRC, even bulbs popping."  That seems to me to be attempts to convey what
you have described, not a dimming, but a brief brightening.

Those reports now make me think the "flickering" and the "flashing" problem
may be more closely related than I first thought.  Perhaps everyone's seeing
what you're seeing but to different degrees.

One thing that I've learned from this thread is that house wiring is
certainly not the passive transport platform I once thought it to be.  I was
disappointed to learn from your experience that more Insteon switches mean
less reliability for co-existing X-10.  The XTB will be a great aid should I
decide I want to switch to Insteon but I don't believe I will go that way.
I'm still leaning toward a hardwired automation system over an RF or PLC
based one for the next house.  It's a lot of work and expense in the
beginning, but it's immune to the problems that afflict RF and PLC based
solutions.

--
Bobby G.