Re: I think they've done it again.

["Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx>]

Since Insteon starts sending data BEFORE the actual zero crossing, I suspect
that dimmers using the zero crossing as a time reference may be confused by
the Insteon signal.  That would cause the triac phase to be modulated by how
early that erroneous zero crossing is detected.  At full intensity, the
triac should be triggered right after the real zero crossing.  If the
Insteon signal causes the triac to be turned on early, it would switch off
at the real zero crossing, and miss conduction for the next half cycle.
Similarly, dimmed lights would change intensity in response to any shifting
trigger phase delay.

Since X10 sends its data after the zero crossing, dimmers that use zero
crossing as a time reference would be unaffected by X10 data.

There are reports of dimmers made by other manufacturers being effected, so
this may be a nasty problem to resolve.

Jeff

"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4496d9fc.206904843@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> As for trying to reconcile the reports, that's what I was alluding to when
I
> said some reports may be due to user inexperience or ineptitude. However,
> there have been reports from someone who is neither inexperienced nor
inept
> that some X-10 dimmers are flickering during Insteon events. I think the
> most likely culprit is excessive triac noise getting to the mains from the
> Insteon dimmers. That could also explain the Lutron dimmer report.
>
> It really seems improbable that Insteon, X-10 & Lutron devices would all
> flicker in some reaction to the low level Insteon control signals.
>
> Also, I'm not really losing confidence in Insteon. I still think the
concept
> is sound. I think the problem is one of too much haste in introducing new
> devices and maybe cost cutting in component choices. The demand has been
> high for new devices