Re: 32 years using x-10

[greenpjs <greenpjs@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2 May 2008 21:08:32 -0400, "Robert Green"
<ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>"greenpjs" <greenpjs@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:n4em145q0hnsbj4tmedf03ho7hn9nut418@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Bobby,
>> From one Mr. Green to another, thanks for your reply.  I received a
>> total of four replies (one via private email) and all of them
>> recommended the XTB-IIR as the closest thing to a silver bullet there
>> is.  I think I will order one.  (It will be fun building a kit again.
>> Heathkit used to get a lot of business from me back in the day -
>> stereo, TVs, ham radio.)
>
>That's good.  It will save you a few bucks to build your own.  I think
>you'll find Jeff's assembly instructions quite thorough and if you buy the
>parts kit, that it's quite well-marked.
I decided to order the fully assembled unit.  The extra cost was
minimal and I'll be able to try it the day it arrives.
>
>> Regarding a meter, I do have an ESM1, but it hasn't been very useful
>> solving the latest round of problems.  I am wondering if there isn't
>> some sort of issue with frequency rather than strength.  For example,
>
>That already tells me something.  The ESM1's biggest weakness, compared to
>something like the Monterey Powerline Signal Analyzer, is the noise readout
>at low levels.  The LED bars just can't compare to the PLSA's digital
>readout of the noise level in millivolts.  The PLSA also takes noise
>readings at two different points on the AC cycle.  It's how I was able to
>find the most recent noisemaker in my house, a shoplite whose bulbs were
>just about burned out.  By moving the PLSA down each outlet in the circuit,
>it was easy to determine whether I was moving toward or away from the noise
>source.
I have a basement full of cheap shoplite's (6 of them).  When they are
on, I definitely have issues, but they aren't typically on.
>
>The ESM1 display was not precise enough to perform that task.  It might give
>you a good enough estimate to find the noise source, though.  Check a few
>outlets with everything turned on to see if you can detect noise on the
>line.  Even half a bar indicates a potential problem.  It's important to
>have everything turned on at once because devices that are fine operating
>alone can cause trouble when operating together on the same circuit.
>Fluorescents are particularly problematic in this regard.  If you're
>anywhere near the nation's capital, I'd be happy to drop by and scope things
>out with the Monterey for you.  I've not yet found a problem it couldn't
>solve or at least shed some light on.
Thanks for the kind offer, but you would have an 8 hour drive to
northeastern Ohio.
>
>> I have two different RF transceivers.  One is an older RR501.  The
>> other is a TM751.   One works better than the other even though they
>> provide similar signal strengths (according to the ESM1) when plugged
>> in the same outlet.  Could one be a little off the 120 kHz frequency?
>> Perhaps some receivers are more sensitive to that than others.  I wish
>> I had an oscilloscope.
>
>The RR has collision detection, but the TM doesn't.  If the RR starts
>transmitting on a clear line, the TM751 can very easily begin transmitting
>as well, and collisions result.  Collisions reveal themselves by working
>*eventually* if you keep pressing the buttons long enough.  A noise or
>signal sucker problem usually won't work at all, no matter how long you
>press the buttons.  One other thing I did was to remove all transceivers
>from the line except a single WGL all housecode unit:
I oversimplified my original description of my system.  I have a few
modules performing a special function on a 2nd housecode.  The TM is
on the other house code.  The RR works best on the main house code,
but both work.  The TM only rarely receives RF commands so it should
only rarely send X-10 commands.  Please correct me if that is wrong.
>
>http://www.wgldesigns.com/v572.html
>
>That step removed so many demons from the X-10 RF side of things that I was
>amazed.  With more than one transceiver, line collisions become a real
>issue.  They could easily account for the intermittent problems you're
>seeing.  Do your intermittent issues disappear if you use only one
>transceiver or would removing one unit make it impossible to tell because of
>range limitations?
The WGL would let me eliminate the 2nd transceiver, but for the reason
I stated above, I doubt that is the problem.
>
>I know you're on a budget, but if you depend on RF X-10 controllers, the WGL
>unit is an important upgrade.  I assume that you are using two transceivers
>because of the abysmal range of the X-10 stock units.  The WGL unit allows
>me to control the X-10 lights from my driveway (about three time the range
>of the TM751) even though the antenna is in the middle of the house.  It
>also plugs directly into the XTB unit's digital input port.  I'm working on
>a detailed article about their latest transceiver that should appear in the
>next month or so.  Although some people operate multiple transceivers
>without issue, I was not able to.  My PLSA used to show collisions for
>nearly every RF transmission until I removed the TM751's and RR501's from
>the mix.  Now the line is remarkably free of signs of signal collisions.  If
>you indeed have filtered all the suckers and noisemakers, this is one place
>I would look.
>
>> Anyway, thanks to all who replied.  You have been very helpful.
>
>Let us know how it all works out!
Will do.  Jeff emailed me and said the XTB-IIR will ship next week.
Thanks, again.
Pat