Re: CM11A lockup (broadcast storm)

["Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx>]

"Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rcGdnYOh6uQdZ1PbnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxx
> "Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:9Wkzi.455352
>
> <(more) stuff snipped>
>
>>>> This feature will be in the XTB-IIR.  I can probably add it to the
>>>> XTB-II firmware when I get the time.  A firmware update will require
>>>> changing the plug-in PIC.
>> >
>> > Can you run them side by side or are there interference issues?
>>
>> There are timing differences regarding internally generated messages that
>> will cause collisions.  However, I have two in service here, and the main
>> issue I see is the two powerful 120KHz outputs beating together.  It is
>> theoritically possible that there will be points where the signals will
>> actually cancel one another when the beat frequency is low enough.
>
> Sounds like it's an either/or proposition.  Too bad.

A house should only need one XTB-II or XTB-IIR.

>>>> The XTB-II was really designed as a 2-phase high-power line interface
>>>> for high end controllers.  The repeater capability was added as a zero
>>>> cost afterthought.  The XTB-IIR is intended primarially as a high-
>>>> power repeater, but it can also boost X10 signals and provide the line
>>>> interface for a high-end controller.
>
> It sounded like the "R" was based on a different PCB but a quick check of
> your site (whose URL should probably be in your sig!)
>
> http://jeffvolp.home.att.net/x10xmtbuf/XTB-IIR_development.htm
>
> says it's a more powerful PIC.  It also sounds as if you've changed other
> components in the IIR.  Am I reading that right?

The PCB is shared.  Too keep the cost down, I added the -IIR components when
I ordered more XTB-II boards after the initial batch.  In addition to the
larger PIC, there is a gain switch in the return signal path (again focusing
on the repeater capability) as well as several smaller changes.  Originally
I had planned on the XTB-II being the end of the line.  After adding the
basic repeater capability to the XTB-II, I wondered how far I could push
that capability - hence the XTB-IIR.

>>> Thanks.  In two years I'll try to remember to ask what the "zero" ended
>>> up equaling.  (-:  There is, IMHO, no such thing as "zero cost"
>>> anymore.  YMMV.
>>
>> Considering that the XTB-II price was not increased from when it was
>> just a 2-phase version of the XTB, I would say the mode options and
>> repeater capability were included at zero cost.
>
> Sorry I was unclear.  With two products doing much the same thing there's
> a
> tendency for dolts like me to get confused as to which does what.  Having
> to
> explain that is a cost.  Having to support it if and when you do get
> around
> to developing the firmware is a cost.  In this case, you're absorbing the
> cost and we thank you muchly for it!  (-:

Yeah, not looking forward to rolling these features over into that other
PIC.

>> That is true if a button sticks or someone stacks something on top of a
>> remote.  However, this thread was started by a CM11A losing its mind.
>> There was also a recent thread about water dripping on a maxicontroller.
>> Those may happen out of the blue, and more than BEEP may be helpful.
>
> I agree.  That's why I think both would be useful, although the beep would
> personally be the more useful element for me, at least based on the most
> recent broadcast storms I've experienced.  It probably wouldn't have been
> warmly received in the case of the CM11A that apparently began sending its
> storm a few hours after being disconnected from its serial cable.

I thought about both myself, but that just caused too many side effects that
had to be worked through.

>> I was in the process of testing the "Status OFF" when I decided the lack
>> of any additional information was a shortcoming.  The code is complex
>> enough without having to jam a "Status OFF" into the middle of a
>> continuous traffic string, so I just let it return traffic that it sees
>> (with the
>> transmitter disabled).
>
> So it's up to the controller to decide what to do based on the traffic it
> sees?  It seems that you then have two control points - one in your
> firmware
> and one in the CMax (or whatever) code that's interpreting the data you're
> sending to the interface.

Actually, it doesn't matter what the controller does as its output will be
inhibited (if it interfaces through the XTB-IIR).  I remember an early post
saying you couldn't find the cause of the problem because the XTB
transmitted with so much power.  The XTB-IIR will just sit there flashing
its LED, and returning line traffic back the digital port.  It will not
transmit anything until the line has cleared for 10 seconds.  It should be
easy then to go around with a signal monitor to find out where the source of
the problem is.

(snipped earlier discussion about modifying a module to be a storm detector)

>> Actually, a mod to something like the chime module should be pretty easy.
>> It would require a little daughter board to be installed in place of the
>> original IC.
>
> I suggested the lamp module simply because I have quite an inventory of
> them
> (as opposed to chime modules) that I'd be willing to hack up in the name
> of
> science.  I assume there's a pin that goes high when the unit receives
> X-10
> signals and you'd simply have to monitor that pin's output with a 555-type
> timing circuit that closed some contacts when the threshold had been
> exceeded.  It could be designed to auto-reset if the storm passed or to
> latch and require a manual button push to reset.  I noticed that some of
> the
> newer gear from X-10 is powered by a wall-wart (the LCD-based Mini-timer,
> for one) so it seems that it would be possible to build a "storm detector"
> without having to worry about dealing with line voltage components and
> unhappy inspectors.

Not so simple.  The modules only monitor a single house/unit code.  The IC
would have to be replaced with one that includes something like the XTB-IIR
line monitor, and its storm detector. There may have to be some power supply
components too.

Jeff