Re: X10 Interference from the Cellet Cellphone Charger

[Marc_F_Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:50:04 -0400, Marc_F_Hult
<MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
<86p0g3l3sbhg7vdvdmkgfuienf3g732qtb@xxxxxxx>:

>On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 04:11:11 GMT, "Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx> wrote in
>message  <zfkLi.150401$ax1.33282@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>>"Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:j4gLi.149589$ax1.72790@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> I can certainly see how this charger will block X10 communication if
the
>>> X10 modules do not incorporate AGC.  I'll do some more testing, and
will
>>> add a report on the X10 Troubleshooting page when I get the chance.
>>
>>First Draft:
>>
>>http://jeffvolp.home.att.net/x10_info/x10_Cellet_noise.htm
>>
>>Comments and questions appreciated.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>
>Looks like an INSTEON killer too (INSTEON self-repetition/signal boosting
>notwithstanding).
>
>And suggests another product that would provide a public service and have
>some commercial potential.
>
>Up to now most folks plug new AC devices into the powerline 'communication
>medium' in their house and then retroactively try to determine what the
>problem is with  X-10 and(or) INSTEON as noise and signal attenuation
>accumulate, in varying degrees, with each device.
>
>A testing tool could provide a more proactive approach by quantitatively
>assessing potential detrimental effects _before_ plugging a prospective
>new electrical device into the 'system'.
>
>It c/would incorporate an isolation filter, noise measurement, signal
>attenuation and visual indicator in one unit. Presumably the 'signal
>attenuation' portion would consist in a transmitter and a receiver that
>would register 100% in the absence of a signal sucker.
>
>For this purpose, the isolation and power to the DUT and the tester itself
>could be provided by a pair of low-voltage transformers with their
>secondaries connected together (with or w/o a capacitor). I've played with
>this arrangement with INSTEON and it works well for isolation (and FWIW,
>for transmission of INSTEON/X-10 signals over a low-voltage AC line when
>the transformers are bypassed with capacitors and the secondaries
connected
>with up to 200 feet of Cat5).
>
>The test function might be incorporated into a future version of the
>XTB-xx transmitter with the front AC outlet that is usually just a
pass-through
>being the outlet into which one plugs in the Device Under Test. Indicators
>could be as simple as one row of LEDs for attenuation and one row for
>noise. Or a small LCD or via RS-232.


It may be time to migrate to a physically larger form-factor than the
CM11a/ACT-TI103/XTB wall-wart model.

Using an enclosure based on an AC outlet power strip would provide needed
volume for filter/isolator and circuitry and allow the outlets to be used
for different purposes including device testing as discussed above, X-10
isolation ( aka "filtering") and even ON-OFF switching. The latter is a
common need for controlling (eg) routers and cable/dsl 'modems'. What
better place to add an X-10 or INSTEON appliance module for that purpose
than immediately adjacent the transmitter on the protected ('firewalled')
side of an isolation device (ala Lightolier Compose).

The volume made available by using a power strip might allow for
incorporation of existing XTB-xx PCBs with little modification -- add-on
PCBs providing additional functionality. The extra volume would also allow
for use of a conventional L-C-L-C-L filter ala X-10/Leviton and ACT that
could be available through one or more of the AC receptacles on the strip.

... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org