X10 Community Forum
🔌General Home Automation => Automating Your House => Troubleshooting Automation Problems => Topic started by: skaggz on January 30, 2011, 11:26:43 AM
-
HELP!
I have been using X-10 for 10 yrs and it has worked perfectly to EVERY module be it an in-wall switch or a plug-in module.
Just a week ago or so I noticed that the Power company had installed a SMART METER on my panel. I just figured, Welcome to the Prison Planet, but didn't think anything about the chance that my power would work differently.
The next day I tried to use one of my 3 remotes to operate the lighting and no response. I tried all the remotes and even new batteries, no change. I moved the TRanciever and got a different result (some worked some not) but not all of them will work regardless of the phase that the transceiver is plugged into.
This troubles me and I am inquiring for anyone else who may have experienced this trouble after a SMart MEter install.
-
Would you happen to know what Manufacturer and Model of this Smart Meter is?
We do have reports of the TED5000 causing X10 problems.
I know Smartlabs is testing their Insteon Smart Grid stuff with some utilities.
http://www.insteonsmartgrid.com/
-
This has been reported by several people now. Something about the powerline communication with those smart meters interferes with X10 control. It would help if we could get some details of their protocol so we can try to come up with a workaround.
Jeff
-
Do you have the 2 phases of the electrical service coupled? Try running your electric clothes dryer and see if all the modules work.
-
Do you have the 2 phases of the electrical service coupled? Try running your electric clothes dryer and see if all the modules work.
The OP said the system had been working for 10 years. It is probably not a coupling problem, unless skaggz had a repeater that suddenly failed, coincidentally the same day the power company installed a Smart Meter.
-
HELP!
Just a week ago or so I noticed that the Power company had installed a SMART METER on my panel. I just figured, Welcome to the Prison Planet, but didn't think anything about the chance that my power would work differently.
Who makes the meter? Is there a manufacturer model number?
I would call the power company and ask about it. So many devices now days use the homes power lines for other communications. Maybe a PZZ01 would help and maybe the power company would pay for and install(?). (Yeah, I know, not very likely).
-
One fellow who ran into this problem was not able to install a Leviton 6284/PZZ01 because of the configuration of his panel. However, he did try a Leviton 6285/XPNR noise reducer. It did reduce the noise level as indicated on the XTBM by a factor of 10, but that still wasn't enough to entirely correct the problem. Adding capacitive “signal suckers” didn't help either, and he eventually gave up on X10.
This was the installation that prompted me to develop the Tuned Signal Sucker. It has even more attenuation than the XPNR, including some “in-band” attenuation. (The amount of in-band attenuation is adjustable with an internal jumper.) The hope is that two of these (one plugged into each phase near the distribution panel) will reduce the noise level sufficiently for X10 devices to work again. The downside is that because of the attenuation of even in-band signals, some sort of signal booster will likely be needed in larger installations.
I do have a couple of beta units still available, and you can contact me by email if you would like to pursue this option.
Jeff
-
One fellow who ran into this problem was not able to install a Leviton 6284/PZZ01 because of the configuration of his panel.
Jeff, is this something from the Smart Meter?
Is this the system where the Smart Meter sends data back up the line to a Wifi or cellular transmitter at the pole xformer?
-
His problem also began right after the installation of a Smart Meter.
I could find almost no details on how smart meters communicate. One manufacturer (Siemens) says they use spread-spectrum technology between 9 and 500KHz. That certainly covers the X10 band. I could find nothing about the actual protocols used.
Jeff
-
From what I'm reading about Smart Meters from our power company, BGE, it replaces the current electric meter, not go into the breaker panel. Right now it's totally optional, plus the company wants the rate payers to pay for them, so the Maryland Public Service Commission is getting involved. The "Smart Meters" are to help the company, not the users.
-
Wow, Great responses. Thank you all Jeff, Dave, Brian and Dan, (forgive me if I missed anyone), I'm brand new and do not yet know how to respond to individual replies but I thank you all and am at least a little comforted knowing that others are with me on this.
The Manufacturer is SILVER SPRINGS NETWORKS it's a FOCUS AXR-SD EPS
under that it reads FORM 25 CL200.
I will call the Subcontractor that installed the device. SMUD, the Utility told me last week when I first called them to complain that I would have to call the Vendor they used to install them.
I can't swear to it but I really do believe that I had a Phase Coupler installed on my side of the Panel and now there is nothing there. I am uncertain because I know I purchased the device from X10 but remember being a little intimidated with connecting up the wires in a 240v panel by myself but I remember not having all my modules working when I first installed them and for the last several years they all have worked irrespective of the Phase they are on so, I'm thinking they removed it because it interfered with their Smart Meter.
Thanks again I will post results.
-
Thanks for the update.
Let us know how it turns out.
I believe I found some information on the meter if any technical type is interested. Page 5 has a description.
Not sure if a X10 coupler between the lines would mess things up
http://www.defranchiseoncor.org/SmartMeters/Landis-Gyr_Focus_AX_Manual_NY_State.pdf
The -SD indicates the utility company can do a remote disconnect of service. ::)
-
Thanks for finding the documentation. It appears that is just a modern day version of the old mechanical electrical meter with a disconnect feature. The meter itself does not include a communication mechanism, but they do refer to a Gridstream RF communication link that runs at 902 to 928MHz. That would certainly not bother X10.
I wonder if this all comes down to their removing the passive coupler when the meter was installed. If so, the first step would be to reinstall a good passive coupler, such as the XPCP.
Jeff
-
Jeff, I've never heard of any electric meter EVER being mounted in a curcit breaker box. Mine certainly isn't, plus usually electric power is delivered at 220 volts and split to 110 in the breaker box(es). That's how my house is wired, half the house is one phase and the other half is on the other phase. I have an electric stove and use the capacitor in the outlet box for the stove trick. My old X10 dealer sold me the proper rated capacitor and I installed it myself. PRESTO!!! my phases were coupled.
-
I never thought the meter was "in" the circuit breaker box. The documentation shows it is intended to be a form-fit-function replacement for the old mechanical meter.
Our main exterior disconnect panel that feeds all 240V loads and several 120V circuits also has the meter plugged right into it. If the passive coupler was installed in that type of panel, it could easily have been removed by the contractor who changed the meter.
The question I had was what kind of communication is used between the utility company and the new smart meter. The Siemens smart meter uses a spread spectrum technique spanning from 9 to 500KHz. Since that overlaps the X10 frequency, it might cause a problem. While this particular meter does not support communication directly, a separate communication module referenced in the documentation works in the 900MHz range. That certainly would not be an issue for X10 communication.
The original poster said he thought there was a phase coupler installed, but it now appears to be missing. Since it is unlikely the meter is the cause of the problem itself, I suspect the problem may be due to the possible removal of that phase coupler by the contractor who replaced the meter.
Of course, the meter does contain electronics. It might also contain a surge protector that is a signal sucker, attenuating an already weak signal to the point it no longer provides reliable control.
Jeff
(http://jvde.us/info/SquareD_MeterPanel.jpg)
-
Thanks Folks I did just Buy and Reinstall the XPCP Coupler and I have No CHANGE.
I still have units A-2, 4, 5, 6, 7 Not Responding regardless of where I place the Transmitter. (just connected a 2nd trans and still no help on any outlet.)
One Lamp Module on Code A-3 does not work while another does on 3. Also working are 8 and 9, both are In Wall Plate modules. The others mentioned above are all In Wall Plate Modules as well that also act as manual dimmer switches. The manual aspect works not the Radio piece though.
My Panel has a single strip for Breakers to connect and every other breaker is Odd, or L1 and the Breakers in between or even numbered are the L2. I ran the wiring as per the instructions so I'm not sure why this didn't work. I also notice that if I hit say number 5 ON many times, using the Remote, the number 3 module will light up, the one that usually does work when 3 is pressed.
It's almost like there's a new radio signal in the house, (or right outside it) that is interfering with the Transmitter on those bands in the 4 to 7 frequencies??
I did get in touch with the company that installed, Silver Springs Networks, and the gentleman there sounded very interested in learning or trying to learn what has happened here. I will post the results in a day or two.
Thanks for everyones help. Mike
-
This does sound very much like powerline noise - particularly that morphing of the A5 command into the A3 command.
From the prior description, the only thing that changed was the smart meter was installed. Documentation on that doesn't show anything that should interfere with X10 communication. However, the communication module is separate. It describes one working in the 900MHz range, but they may have used a different one that works near the X10 frequency.
If you speak to the installer again, try to find out if the meter could be sending a signal in the 100KHz to 150KHz range.
Jeff
-
I have the same model smart meter installed by SMUD and I haven't noticed any related issues with my rather small, but growing x10 system. The only problem I have noticed is sometimes one of the lamp modules comes on/off for no apparent reason. Often, right after the kitchen florescent light has switched. I believe this is power line noise not related to the smart meter.
2 Old LM465 Lamp Modules
2 MS14 Eagle Eye Sensors
1 WS13 Wall Switch
3 WS467 Wall Switches
1 WS4777 3 Way Wall Switch
1 Universal Module
AHP and CM15A
Palm Pad
3 Button Stick-on Wall Switch
3-Button Credit Card Remote
-
I have been using X-10 for at least 17 years. My three systems, either do not respond at all, or operate on their own initiative. It took my weeks to figure out that the signals are being blocked in some manner and that the Smart Meter is likely the culprit. I have had numerous conversations with PG&E and an individual who was identified as a rep of the Smart Meter manufacturer. All to no avail. I have also filed a complaint with the PUC. One of the consistent responses I get, is that PG&E is generally unaware of this problem. That my be BS or true, but the problem needs to addressed, not just by users, but also, by the manufacturers and the retailers. After all, it is their business that is being destroyed. I certainly won't purchase any more x-10, until and unless I have real assurances that it will work. I am in the SF Bay Areal.
-
It would be interesting to find out exactly what is going on with smart meters from a signal point of view. The question is whether smart meters are generating noise in the X10 transmission windows, or are they attenuating the X10 signal levels. The latter is easy to deal with by boosting signal levels. Noise is a more difficult problem. A PZZ01 may help if it is noise. However, there may still have to be additional filtering specifically designed to reduce intrusion of the smart meter signals onto the household wiring. The more we can learn about the details of this equipment, the better chance we have on coming up with a solution that works.
Jeff
-
Jeff: On an individual basis, it is probably next to impossible to get that level of information. I really have better things to do, than spend hours on the line with individuals who don't understand the problem, or, understanding the problem, are directed to divert and delay. I would think that the manufacturers or retailers, who, after all, if they sell a product knowing there is a potential problem with its use, are putting themselves in jeopardy, both their finances and reputation at risk, should be actively pursuing this issue.
-
Having read this entire thread, and my electric and gas meters are both inside mounted, if BGE (Baltimore Gas & Electric) wants to install a smart meter, I'm going to ask for the frequency it uses, if they don't have it, they don't get access to my house. Smart meters are really for the company, they don't give the user any access to it.
-
I have two x10 installations which have both been wrecked by smart meters recently. Both essentially lost one phase completely. One was new with a CM11A and one was 15+ years old(think RS Color computer interface). Neither required a phase bridge initially and neither responded to a bridge(XPCP) installation after the problem occured. One has since had a bridge repeater (XPCR) installed in the breaker box and appears to be working okay now although I have not tested it extensively. Based on that scenario, the problem appears to be a signal strength problem rather than a pure interference problem although the spread spectrum aspect of the com from the smart meter could easily disrupt the X10 signals on a random basis.
-
Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I just had an Echelon smart meter installed and my X10 system working perfectly for 17 years is now acting up. I can control all units, but they tend to myseriously turn themselves on, especially at 3-4am (all lights come on). I have a PZZ01 installed so I thought I wouldn't have noise or external signal issues. I've also tried an XPCR to no avail. Any new info on this? This thread has been dead since March and new smart meters are getting installed daily, so I'd think it would be more of a problem for the X10 community. A Google search turned up very little...
Here's a link to the meter: http://www.echelon.com/metering/nes_smartmeters.htm (http://www.echelon.com/metering/nes_smartmeters.htm)
Thanks
Jeff
-
Several people have reported X10 problems after installation of a smart meter. To address this and other noise issues, I have been developing an Active Noise Reducer, which is described in another thread:
http://forums.x10.com/index.php?topic=25126.0 (http://forums.x10.com/index.php?topic=25126.0)
So far all reports from the beta testers have been positive, but I have not heard from all of them yet. An early production version of that unit is now available.
If the ANR doesn’t do the job (whose purpose is to severely load down noise levels), I have been thinking about an alternate (but much more expensive) approach. It involves essentially building a very wide bandwidth stereo amplifier with sufficient power to null out any noise signal. The connection point would be at the distribution panel, and that would be the null summing junction. The X10 signal would be extracted from the error signal, and the nulling function switched off when a valid X10 signal is detected on the powerline. Or it could be designed to even boost the valid X10 signal level.
I was also thinking about a possible evolution of X10 to a highly reliable communication system that would be backward compatible with present units. GPS signals are very weak, but they are recovered from the background noise level through the principle of correlation. It is amazing to see the signal level pop up when the bit streams are in sync. I’m thinking about modulating the X10 120KHz carrier with a unique bit pattern such that the X10 signal can be recovered by correlation even when buried in the noise (just like GPS signals).
Jeff
-
I have an Echelon meter and while I experience periods every evening when none of my RF remotes work, PLC commands still work.
I can see no noise with my ESM1 but haven't had time to setup anything to test for any RF that might be blocking my remotes.
I'll also try to find time to read the documentation for the BPL standards referenced in Echelon's datasheet for the meter. There is also one obscure reference to Zigbee but that should be well above the X-10 RF frequency.
But, at this time, I really cannot say the meter is a problem. I may just have a neighbor with a plasma TV which are notoriously noisy.
-
I have no RF in my system, so any issues would be over the power. It literally happened the day they installed it. Previously, I had 17 years of pretty much trouble-free operation. I also have a whole house couple/block that is supposed to knock down anything coming in from outside. It's located inside my panel on this side of the meter, so you'd think it would be blocking signals/noise coming out of the meter.
Jeff, would I need two of these one for each phase? How does one go about getting one (or two) to test?
Thanks,
Jeff
-
Jeff, would I need two of these one for each phase? How does one go about getting one (or two) to test?
All the beta units are gone, but please contact me privately.
Jeff
-
I have no RF in my system, so any issues would be over the power. It literally happened the day they installed it.
There is another recent thread that raises my suspicion that these meters cause X-10 issues but I'm still looking for a smoking gun to confirm it.
- http://forums.x10.com/index.php?topic=25245.0
-
There is another recent thread that raises my suspicion that these meters cause X-10 issues but I'm still looking for a smoking gun to confirm it.
About a year ago one of my customers started having problems with his X10 system. The problems began after the electric company changed his meter. As I recall, adding a PZZ01 helped, but did not solve all the problems. Through thorough troubleshooting - essentially turning off all circuits except one for for X10 testing - he was pretty convinced that the problem was coming in over the utility feed. Eventually he threw in the towel completely on his X10 system.
That got me started on trying to solve the X10 noise problem - initially with the Tuned Signal Sucker (which not even all the beta units were requested), and more recently the Active Noise Reducer. In my testing here that is working really well, but still can't totally eliminate the problem from that Lumoform 4W LED light.
If I was going to design a noise generator, I don't think I could do much better than that Lumoform light. It puts out a VERY strong signal almost exactly at 120KHz, and the noise burst starts just like a X10 signal. Unfortunately, there may be some devices that will still have to be isolated with an appropriate filter.
Jeff
-
Here are a couple snippets from an email I just received:
I have been using an X10 system in my home for around 20 years with very few problems until recently. Suddenly I have several lights that come on and go off at random. I have tried changing house codes, replacing, switches and disconnecting command modules with no improvement."
... "I find it strange that the random events first showed up when my power company installed a digital power meter. replacing the old style meter. Even if the problem is the new meter, complaining to Edison Electric is like pounding sand."
Jeff
-
Those snippets on Jeff's post yesterday are from the email I sent Jeff. After thinking about my problem more, I tend to think that the new smart meter may have less inductance than the old meter and thereby allowing X10 control signals to arrive from a neighbor's house. The old meter was an induction motor technology where the motor windings provide a flux field to drive an aluminum disk. I have ordered an XTBM Kit from Jeff and as soon as I finish the construction of the XTBM, I will continue to investigate the problem. My meter is mounted in the same box as the breakers and I will not be able to install one of the whole house filter on the neutral between the meter and the breakers. I have some other thoughts as to how I might install a filter on the output of the breakers that go to the lighting and receptacle circuits. I will test my filter idea once I have the XTBM working. My idea involves using a ferrite core with a tertiary winding and capacitor tuned to 120Khz. I will use a fairly large core that will allow me to pass multiple circuits through the center of the core. I hope it helps.
-
As to X10 control signals to arrive from a neighbor's house, doubt that. X10 is NOT mass marketed and never was. I got turned on to X10 from a close friend in the middle 1980's and to this day, NOBODY else on my street (or my transformer) has X10. Where I got my X10 start is long gone. If you read my earlier post, I live in Baltimore and BGE (our utility) is pushing Smart Meters, but both my gas and electric meters are inside my house, so I'm not letting them in if they want to install a Smart Meter.
-
My smart meter is an OpenWay by Itron. They use 902Mhz at up to 1 watt for the communications. 902Mhz should not be a problem for the X10 system, however, if they modulate the carrier with 120Khz at times, and any X10 device rectifies the signal, random interference may result. I found that even after removing all of my command modules, I still had random on/off events occurring, mostly in the evenings. I don't use any RF remotes in my X10 system. I also noticed that the modules which had the random events were the ones closest to the power panel (smart meter). I'm considering installing an RF filter at one of the problem X10 modules to see if it will help.
-
I found that even after removing all of my command modules, I still had random on/off events occurring, mostly in the evenings. I don't use any RF remotes in my X10 system.
So you are saying; at that point there was nothing in your house that could send an X10 code? Does sorta point to the meter or out side signals creeping in. If from meter that will be yet another nail in X10 coffin. Let us know after assembling the "saa-weet" XTBM.
-
In my case I'm still leaning towards RF from the lady in the apartment above mine.
But, I have a 1MHz-3GHz frequency counter, that I'll try as soon as I can find a power supply. It may not have enough sensitivity. As I recall it could only pick up an X-10 remote when within 1/2 inch.
-
I don't think you will ever see an RF signal at this low of a level with a frequency counter. You would need a communications receiver tuned to the X10 receiver frequency and a way to capture and record the signal. The signal levels for the power level allowed are down around several micro-volts/meter. I'm assuming you have an X10 RF remote, or are you thinking that the RF signal is strong enough to somehow effect your wired modules?
-
The one thing most, if not all, of the smart meters have in common is ZigBee @ 915MHz. (Itron also uses ZigBee.) Older X-10 RF transceivers use superregenerative receivers @ 310MHz. 915 / 3 = 305 so it would not surprise me to find things like an RR501 or older TM751 (both of which I'm using) being affected by a nearby 915MHz signal. I've seen other, non-X10 superregenerative receivers interfere when within 6' of each other.
- http://davehouston.org/modules.htm
Newer X-10 transceivers (more recent TM751s, CM15A) use a single chip superheterodyne receiver (even newer RR501s still use superregenerative) and I don't know how well they deal with third harmonics. X-10 uses a coil with a tuning slug for the oscillator on these so they may also be susceptible to a local 3rd harmonic with the tuning coil acting as antenna.
- http://www.allparts.co.kr/pdffile/pdffile_001/3274.pdf
-
My smart meter is an OpenWay by Itron and the radio frequencies used are defined in this document:
http://www.sdge.com/documents/smartmeter/OpenWay%20RF%20FAQ.pdf (http://www.sdge.com/documents/smartmeter/OpenWay%20RF%20FAQ.pdf)
My system does not have a radio frequency remote control, yet I have the random on/off event problem.
I did not have a problem with non-responsive modules. I can see the possibility of the 900Mhz smart meter producing random events if you are using an RF remote, however I can not find an explanation for any non-responsive module problems being caused by the 900Mhz smart meter communications unless the non-response problem is also random. The smart meter should not be transmitting continuously. I believe that the X10 system signal might be attenuated by the electronics in the meter or a reduction of inductance between the source and load side of the smart meter compared to the old meters.
Or simply stated, the smart meters may be signal suckers. It also occurred to me that the power companies are pushing residential solar power systems. These systems use static converters to convert the solar panel direct current to 60Hz AC. These are switch mode power converters and are often the source of harmonics. If solar converters combined with the new smart meters are contributing to the noise problem, we should see a noticeable difference between night and day.
-
... the radio frequencies used are defined in this document:
The referenced document says 902-928MHz ISM band with frequency hopping (FHSS) and 2.4GHz. However, another press release said Itron was certified by the ZigBee alliance and ZigBee Certification requires Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) instead of frequency hopping. Checking the FCC IDs from the document gives 927.45MHz for all but one model which is listed as 921.8MHz. 927.45/3=309.15
- https://www.itron.com/newsAndEvents/Pages/OpenWay-by-Itron-Earns-ZigBee-Smart-Energy-Certification.aspx
Momentary brownouts and/or spikes will cause the chips used by X-10 to reset, resulting in random on/off events. Since these meters also can shed loads, it may be they are putting a bit of hash on the powerlines but this might be really, really hard to document. I had an LM14A that would turn off nearly every time a 60 year old fluorescent in one bathroom was turned off. I could see nothing on the powerline because it was so brief but replacing the switch (in which the arcing was visible) with an Insteon Icon model (used in X10 mode) cured the problem.
-
One more bit of data. I did a search using "smart meter" of the Smarthome Insteon forum without getting a single hit. That, along with my ESM1, makes me doubt it's powerline noise causing my intermittently non-responsive transceiver problem.
Some of these meters may have filters to block their powerline signals from reaching the residence side and those might be attenuating X-10 signals.
-
Some of these meters may have filters to block their powerline signals from reaching the residence side and those might be attenuating X-10 signals.
One might think that, but one of my customers had very strong signals, but still could not get his X10 system to work reliably after a smart meter was installed. And low signal levels should result in devices not responding at all. Some of the reports have been random actuations after a smart meter installation - particularly during the middle of the night.
Jeff
-
That is more evidence that the random on/offs may be from spikes or brownouts affecting X-10's chips. I've never heard of similar issues with Insteon so that could also explain why Insteon seems to have no issues with the meters. Here's a thread from a Smarthome forum that may point us in the right direction - it mentions pulses from some meters used for measuring usage - these might be the culprits.
- http://www.smarthome.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5507
-
Momentary brownouts and/or spikes will cause the chips used by X-10 to reset, resulting in random on/off events. Since these meters also can shed loads, it may be they are putting a bit of hash on the powerlines but this might be really, really hard to document. I had an LM14A that would turn off nearly every time a 60 year old fluorescent in one bathroom was turned off. I could see nothing on the powerline because it was so brief but replacing the switch (in which the arcing was visible) with an Insteon Icon model (used in X10 mode) cured the problem.
Posted on: October 27, 2011, 10:08:56 PM
Posted by: Backward Engineering
OK, I have the equipment to instrument the power line but I don't know when I will have the time to set it up. I have a Astro-Med 16 channel chart recorder with high speed capture to memory. I can set it up to monitor line voltage on one channel and the output on the load side of a light switch module on a second channel. I can program it to trigger on a change in the status on the load side. This recorder can capture events as short as a few microseconds and display both pre and post event analog data. I also have a digital storage oscilloscope with a printer interface that I might also try. I received my XTBM kit today and I will be focusing on assembling the XTBM initially. I always thought that when I retired I would have as much time as I wanted to work on these things. I now see that I was wrong. I was working in power conversion engineering before retiring.
-
If these smart meters can shed loads, it would be interesting to learn what technology is used to switch the 100-200 amp load. Many solid state power devices will generate waveform distortion at zero crossing, right where X10 communicates. Do the smart meters use solid state devices to load shed? Do they use IGBTs? If IGBTs are used and the load shed is reconnected at any time during the cycle other than near zero crossing, the result can be very high di/dt which can be destructive to some types of loads. I guess I need to setup that chart recorder to get some answers.
-
If these smart meters can shed loads, it would be interesting to learn what technology is used to switch the 100-200 amp load. Many solid state power devices will generate waveform distortion at zero crossing, right where X10 communicates. Do the smart meters use solid state devices to load shed? Do they use IGBTs? If IGBTs are used and the load shed is reconnected at any time during the cycle other than near zero crossing, the result can be very high di/dt which can be destructive to some types of loads. I guess I need to setup that chart recorder to get some answers.
If my guesswork is on the right track, I'm not sure it matters what is used to shed the loads because the problems seem to arise where there is no load shedding hardware. One thread on the Smarthome forum alluded to the meters outputting pulses that could be used by third party devices to track power usage, etc. (perhaps to determine when to shed some load?) I think the person mentioning it is with ISY and they are doing some things in this area. The pulses may be enough to explain the random on/off X-10 events and they're the only thing that seems to cover all the reported variations. There's an X-10 FAQ that acknowledges the "spike/brownout" vulnerability.
- http://www.x10.com/support/x10trou.htm#on
I've tried to get the Zigbee Smart Energy specification to see whether the pulses are documented but, so far, no download link has arrived in my email.
-
Here are a couple of snippets from another fellow who experienced a problem after installation of a smart meter:
However (aha!), the power company did put in a "smart meter" about a month ago. Supposedly this system runs using low power RF on two different bands above 900 MHz. I have found one sentence in a Duke Energy web note that says something more interesting:
"In most cases, the digital electric meter Duke Energy is installing uses Power Line Carrier technology to send data from the meter to a communications node mounted a short distance away on an outside transformer. This set up uses a very low power radio frequency (RF) signal that actually travels along the power line as opposed to through the air."
Duke Energy has no human beings working for it that I have found. The meter may be read as often as every 15 minutes or as seldom as once a day, according to another Duke web note.
And more recently:
This morning I was walking in the next township over from ours and happened past a Duke meter reader. I told him I thought he had been replaced with the smart meters. He said that things were not working well and Duke was already planning to replace the presently installed units with a different unit in November.
Jeff
-
I may be way off here, but isn't there some FCC regulation that says that electrical devices can't cause unwanted interference with other electrical devices (I don't know the exact terms of the regulation, but you see it all the time with things like cordless phones, etc)?
Wouldn't that apply to the installation of a SmartMeter, too? If it interferes with the proper operation of a customer's existing X10 system, shouldn't the power company be legally obligated to remove it?
-
Methinks we have a smoking gun. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_meter
Some meters have an open collector output that gives 32-100 ms pulses for a constant amount of used electrical energy. Usually 1000-10000 pulses per kWh. Output is limited to max 27 V DC and 27 mA DC. The output usually follows the DIN 43864 standard.
Searching on DIN 43864 results in numerous links from meter manufacturers that mention the pulses but none that I read really added any detail to the above quote.
Such pulses might indeed cause the apparently random events being reported. Somehow the pulses get past the transformerless power supply and directly affect the PIC in switches and lamp modules. X-10 designers also have had a tendency to let unused PIC pins float which can lead to problems. Insteon designs use different MCUs and better engineering so are probably immune which explains why there are no similar reports on the Insteon forums. They might, however, wreak havoc on UPB systems - UPB uses similar amplitude pulses for powerline communication.
As for noam's question, the FCC prohibition applies to unlicensed radio devices transmitting over the air. I don't think the FCC even regulates powerline communications (or conducted emissions) unless they radiate energy that interferes. Anyway, the interference referred to is with licensed use of the frequency in question and X-10 is neither licensed for PLC nor RF.
I have a Parallax USB 'scope which, IIRC, can be setup to trigger on a rising/falling edge. If I can dig it up along with a 25VAC transformer, I should be able to get some pictures. BTW, I just realized I had misread the duration of these pulses. 32-100ms can span 3-12 half-cycles - I had expected they were much shorter. Although, I have seen ms frequently misused when the writer meant µS.
-
As I posted before in this thread, my electric meter in inside my house. If BGE (Baltimore Gas & Electric) is pushing Smart Meters and can't prove it won't disrupt my X10 system, they don't get access, period. I pay them for my electric service, they don't pay me.
-
But the pulses could come from your neighbor's meter, as well. rofl
-
I may be way off here, but isn't there some FCC regulation that says that electrical devices can't cause unwanted interference with other electrical devices (I don't know the exact terms of the regulation, but you see it all the time with things like cordless phones, etc)?
Yes, but from an RF or emitted standpoint. I don't think the FCC gives a rip about spurious signals that remain contained in a conductor. If it is energetic enough, frequency wise, power wise, etc. to start transmitting through open air, then they wake up, otherwise no.
i.e even through 120kHz is considered in the radio spectrum, X10, Smarthome, etc is not required to get "Type Acceptance" for their plug-in controllers since the 120kHz is carried by wires and not by air.
-
A quick update on my random event problem. I finished assembling the XTBM today and started investigating the problem. I found a very high noise level on one side of my 120-0-120 volt service. I traced the noise to a switch mode power supply located in my motorhome. The power supply is a Todd PC75, 12 VDC 75 Amp unit switching at around 25Khz. Depending on the duty cycle of the switching transistor, the supply might be generating a large 120Khz component. The power supply had been is service for years with no X10 interference. Something has changed in the operation of the power supply. I'm now troubleshooting the power supply to find out why it is now a noise generator. Probably failing filter capacitors. I have had all of my X10 modules re-enabled (slide switch closed) now for several hours with no random events so far. I now need to reinstall my X10 repeated and then, since I have the XTBM, I should check the signal strength throughout the house. I would not have guessed that a random noise generator could have produced random X10 events, but it looks like that's what was happening.
Thank you Jeff for this valuable tool. #:)
Don
-
Actually Don, we should be thanking you for taking the time to figure this out. I'm tired of people just giving up on their X10 investments. With a little trouble shooting and some "backwards engineering" most X10 problems can be solved.
Yes, Jeff is relentless in his pursuit to find new ways to make x10 compatible with all the newer technologies, but when people fail to read his tutorials, or fail to pick up one of his tools, it's still a lost cause. Jeff has a new "tuned signal sucker" which might just do the trick on the motor home, but how many people know that? I'm betting you'll just fix the caps in the camper, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.
Anyhow, have a +1 from me for bothering to report your findings and an eventual happy ending to this saga.
-
Jeff has a new "tuned signal sucker" which might just do the trick on the motor home, but how many people know that?
Actually I also have an Active Noise Reducer (XTB-ANR) to combat noise. The beta tests have gone well, and that unit is just going into early production. That might do the job if it is plugged into a receptacle in the motorhome.
Jeff
-
Don -
Another +1 from me, too.
So, it looks like the SmartMeter is NOT the culprit here. That's actually good to know. However, something with the new SmartMeter might have caused a change in the noise being put out by the power supply in the motorhome, I suppose.
Is there a way to put an X10 noise filter between the RV and the house?
-
The smart meter might not be his problem, but it sure as heck is mine... Recap: 17 years of no problems. The day my smart meter was installed, random events on various house codes (mainly very early in the morning 3-4am). I even have a PZZ01 and an XPCR. Both have not solved the problem.
Jeff
-
As of this morning, 18 hours with no random events.
Thanks for the compliments. A passive T network filter on the motorhome's 30A shore power plug might solve the problem but the power supply had not caused a problem until recently. The timing of the power supply noise problem coincided with the installation of the smart meter. With my background in power electronics engineering, I have no excuse for not addressing the problem methodically. That means I will repair the power supply and then possibly add a filter . The last thing I need is a 900 watt power supply located under the bed catching fire.
I found a retired engineer on the internet that had reverse engineered a schematic of the power supply. He offered free advice and a copy of the schematic. The power supply already includes a line filter ahead of the bridge rectifier. If anyone is interested in my findings and repairs of the power supply, post a request, otherwise I will proceed without comments on the repair. I think the power supply repair might be getting off topic for this forum.
Alternate methods to solve the noise problem are:
Method 1) Pull the plug on the motorhome, get behind the wheel and hit the road. Perfect isolation. After all, I'm supposed to be retired.
Method 2) Finish the installation of solar panels on the motorhome (project #959) to maintain the battery charge and pull the plug.
I hope I didn't get too far off topic.
Don
-
... A passive T network filter on the motorhome's 30A shore power plug might solve the problem...
I am guessing that the term "shore power" is a holdover from the boating world, but it really shouldn't apply to motorhomes. Unless you are plugging it into to a power source on a boat, ALL power would be "shore power" (including the onboard generator or solar panels). ;)
-
The smart meter might not be his problem, but it sure as heck is mine... Recap: 17 years of no problems. The day my smart meter was installed, random events on various house codes (mainly very early in the morning 3-4am). I even have a PZZ01 and an XPCR. Both have not solved the problem.
Jeff
I'm guessing that you don't have a motorhome (like Don), but perhaps there is some device in your home that is reacting "funny" to the new meter, and is putting out random noise that happens to look like commands? I know it is a long shot, but you never know.
Do you have a PC interface (like the CM11 or CM15), through which you can look at the Activity logs? If the "random commands" are only coming in on one or two (or a small number of) house codes, then perhaps you can fix the problem by moving your modules off those codes.
-
Don't have access to the logs right now, but yes it does appear to be only 2-3 HCs. The times are always around 2:30am, 3:30am and 4:30am. Wouldn't the PZZ01 knock that down, or is it just too strong? I'm going to reset my system and exclude those HCs and see what happens. Still not a fix as I use most of the HCs in my HA system....
Jeff
-
Don't have access to the logs right now, but yes it does appear to be only 2-3 HCs. The times are always around 2:30am, 3:30am and 4:30am. Wouldn't the PZZ01 knock that down, or is it just too strong? I'm going to reset my system and exclude those HCs and see what happens. Still not a fix as I use most of the HCs in my HA system....
Jeff
If you can narrow it down to specific UNIT codes, too, you might be able to avoid the problem codes, and still have enough to go around.
The PZZ01 is designed to block incoming X10 signals, but maybe the incoming signals are strong enough that they still make it through. The other possibility (as I mentioned before) is that some other device in your home is actually creating the noise, due to some sort of interaction with the Smart Meter.
You would think that if they are sending signals back to the utility company over the powerline to report information, they could figure out a way to only send the signals in one direction, and prevent them from coming into the house wiring.
-
You would think that if they are sending signals back to the utility company over the powerline to report information, they could figure out a way to only send the signals in one direction, and prevent them from coming into the house wiring.
This is deliberate as they want third-party energy use monitors to be able to access the signals. It wouldn't do much for usage awareness if you had to go out and climb a pole to see the data. :'
-
A couple of weeks before they intalled the meters, they installed these repeaters on the outside of all of our ground level transformers. Apparently these are the devices that receive meter info via PLC (over about 100 ft of power line from house to xformer) and then process it and send the data back to the utility company.
Jeff
More info here: http://www.duke-energy.com/pdfs/Smart-Grid-Ohio-Facts.pdf (http://www.duke-energy.com/pdfs/Smart-Grid-Ohio-Facts.pdf)
Here's a picture:
(http://www.jlbutler.net/Image1.jpg)
-
But the pulses could come from your neighbor's meter, as well. rofl
Not likely. My next door neighbor's electric service is on a different transformer than my service.
-
I used the term "Shore Power" only because the company that manufactured the powered cord real that I installed calls it a 12 volt powered "Shore Power" real. I guess that makes my RV amphibious. I just found a dead X10 command Center in my home. I should mention that about 6 weeks ago we had lightening strike a tree that was only 8 feet from the RV where I had been standing only 2 minutes earlier The X10 noise problem had started weeks prior to the lightening strike and I was not using the X10 system because of the noise issue. We have lived in the same house for 39 years and this is the only time we have had lightening strike so close. The lightening strike took out our SCE pole mounted transformer and I'm not surprised by some failures in my electronics. It could have been much worse.
Skipper Don
-
You would think that if they are sending signals back to the utility company over the powerline to report information, they could figure out a way to only send the signals in one direction, and prevent them from coming into the house wiring.
This is deliberate as they want third-party energy use monitors to be able to access the signals. It wouldn't do much for usage awareness if you had to go out and climb a pole to see the data. :'
Here in Maryland, they tell us that after the install the smart meters, we will be able to log into the power company's website, and see our energy usage statistics. I don't see why that requires sending the data through the power lines INTO my home.
-
But the pulses could come from your neighbor's meter, as well. rofl
Not likely. My next door neighbor's electric service is on a different transformer than my service.
So you're the only house on your transformer?
-
I used the term "Shore Power" only because the company that manufactured the powered cord real that I installed calls it a 12 volt powered "Shore Power" real. I guess that makes my RV amphibious. I just found a dead X10 command Center in my home. I should mention that about 6 weeks ago we had lightening strike a tree that was only 8 feet from the RV where I had been standing only 2 minutes earlier The X10 noise problem had started weeks prior to the lightening strike and I was not using the X10 system because of the noise issue. We have lived in the same house for 39 years and this is the only time we have had lightening strike so close. The lightening strike took out our SCE pole mounted transformer and I'm not surprised by some failures in my electronics. It could have been much worse.
Skipper Don
I still suspect that the smart meter might be causing the power supply in the RV to be noisier than it was before.
Before you repair the power supply, you might try (if you have an opportunity to do so) to find a place to plug it in that is NOT on a smart meter (a friend's house, perhaps, or using a portable generator, or something like that), and use the XTBM to see if the noise levels are the same.
-
Here in Maryland, they tell us that after the install the smart meters, we will be able to log into the power company's website, and see our energy usage statistics. I don't see why that requires sending the data through the power lines INTO my home.
I think the ultimate goal is to allow Duke to control your HVAC, water heater, etc, for load control during peak periods. I suspect the reference about sending data back to customer is refering to data for appliance control. They will need such control after everyone is forced to drive the Obama Volt. ::)
-
I have also read about being able to shed loads inside your house remotely. B:(
-
I still suspect that the smart meter might be causing the power supply in the RV to be noisier than it was before.
Before you repair the power supply, you might try (if you have an opportunity to do so) to find a place to plug it in that is NOT on a smart meter (a friend's house, perhaps, or using a portable generator, or something like that), and use the XTBM to see if the noise levels are the same.
Having a background in Power Electronics Engineering, I prefer the analytical approach over the empirical method. When I speak of Power Electronics Engineering, I'm referring to static power converters in the mufti-megawatt range where power factor correction is normally required.
The power company here, SCE, has offered us a rate reduction if we agree to allow them to control our HVAC. The problem is, we don't have or need HVAC. We are close enough to the coast that the weather here is always mild. They would control the power to the HVAC via power line communications. So we pay the higher rates because we use less. Isn't that upside down?
Don
-
The power company here, SCE, has offered us a rate reduction if we agree to allow them to control our HVAC. The problem is, we don't have or need HVAC. We are close enough to the coast that the weather here is always mild. They would control the power to the HVAC via power line communications. So we pay the higher rates because we use less. Isn't that upside down?
You don't have an HVAC system at all? If you do (but don't use it), let them install the control box, just to get the reduced rate.
If you don't, pick up a window unit and a space heater, have them come in, scratch their heads, and then insist on getting the rate reduction.
-
No, I don't have HVAC at all. That's why we live in Southern California, Great Weather. The local electric company requires the HVAC to be a central unit with the required interface for remote control by the power company. I could probably get a government rebate for an energy efficient HVAC, but I would consider that a waste of taxpayer money. It's like the rate payer funded giveaway of electric lawn mowers to people that didn't even have a lawn.
-
I have been communicating with another fellow having problems with his X10 system since installation of a smart meter. It is manufactured by Echelon. In the documentation there are numerous references to LonWorks. Searching that turned up some transceivers for communicating over the powerline. Now here is the interesting factor. The spec sheet on one of those devices quotes carrier frequencies as 132KHz (primary) and 115KHz (secondary).
Since the X10 bandpass is 120KHz, and X10 devices do not incorporate a very selective input stage, it is entirely possible that the 115KHz, and even the 132KHz, will interfere with X10 communication if it is being transmitted during the X10 transmit window. I have yet to find details of the actual communication protocol, so I don't know for sure that the smart meter transmitter would be active during that interval.
Jeff
-
132KHz. Right on top of Insteons 131.65 KHz. ;D
-
132KHz. Right on top of Insteons 131.65 KHz. ;D
Duke uses Echelon meters but there's not a single report of smart meters causing problems on Smarthome's Insteon forum. Since Insteon also operates at ZC, it should also be affected if this is the source of the X-10 problems. Everything I've seen indicates that all of the smart meters are using Zigbee (since it's an open standard) which uses DSSS spread spectrum (centered at 915MHz but covering ALL of 902-928MHz) as well as the pulses related to usage I documented earlier. I haven't seen LonWorks mentioned in regards to the meters. Even the article referenced below seems to indicate that it's more of an adjunct for industrial/commercial applications than part of their basic meter. Also, it doesn't explain the reports related to other, non-Echelon meters.
Echelon has been doing this in Europe for years and I've seen no complaints from European X-10 users.
- http://livemetering.blogspot.com/2009/03/echelon-corp-has-released-new-version.html
Unfortunately, it appears the only way to get the documentation for Echelon's powerline protocol is to buy it after signing an NDA.
-
Since Smartlabs is into Smart Grid Developement.
They probably have addressed any potential issues.
http://www.insteonsmartgrid.com/
-
Duke uses Echelon meters but there's not a single report of smart meters causing problems on Smarthome's Insteon forum. Since Insteon also operates at ZC, it should also be affected if this is the source of the X-10 problems. Everything I've seen indicates that all of the smart meters are using Zigbee (since it's an open standard) which uses DSSS spread spectrum (centered at 915MHz but covering ALL of 902-928MHz) as well as the pulses related to usage I documented earlier. I haven't seen LonWorks mentioned in regards to the meters.users.
Here is a datasheet for one of the meters I looked at: http://www.echelon.com/metering/datasheets/ANSI_2s.pdf
It says: “Every NES smart meter includes Echelon’s proven standards-based power line communication technology – the world’s most widely deployed signaling technology.”
Chasing that path further, the meter communicates with the NES “data concentrator” using LonWorks:
http://www.echelon.com/company/news/articles/2010/2010.04.13_SmartGridToday-2mmMeters.pdf
Then researching LonWorks tuned up the powerline transceivers:
http://www.echelon.com/support/documentation/datashts/15330.pdf
The spec sheet on that says the carrier is at 132KHz (primary) and 115KHz (secondary).
I think the problem is not the communication inside the home, which may indeed be Zigbee, it is the communication with the “data concentrator” at the utility transformer. That is leaking over into the home wiring.
As you know X10 signals are sent as 1mS long bursts of 120KHz. Presence of a burst is decoded as a logic “1”, and absence as a logic “0”. In measurements here I found that as little as 30mVpp of 120KHz injected onto the powerline would prevent an X10 appliance module from decoding X10 commands. Sensitivity decreases as the frequency deviates from 120KHz, but in other testing X10 modules could still decode commands from a Maxi Controller running at 130KHz.
If there is any significant leakage of those 115KHz or 132KHz frequencies onto the home wiring, it could certainly cause a problem for X10 communication. Since Insteon does not need the absence of a signal to decode a “0”, it is more immune to this interference, particularly if it is at a relatively low level.
Jeff
-
Jeff, thanks for the references. I should have remembered the Echelon chip - I looked at it (probably an earlier version) a long time ago.
I'm still skeptical. They use BPSK which Insteon also uses so it should stomp all over Insteon. However, it also has CSMA/CD which means it should sense either Insteon or X-10 and back off. Plus, it still doesn't explain the non-Echelon meters (unless they've all licensed the Echelon technology/chip or are using the same methodology).
Here's a helpful reference on Cenelec A, B & C-band...
- http://www.domologic.de/download/pdf/konnex_pl132_en.pdf
It seems Cenelec realized the error of their ways with allowing unlimited 433.92MHz RF systems.
If the pulses employed truly are 20-100 milliseconds long, I'm not sure my USB scope will see them as I'll need to connect it thru a 25VAC transformer. If they are of µS durations, they might not pass the transformer, either. And, it's not 100% clear whether these pulses are on the powerline or only on the serial or IR output.
-
Today I found another noise source in my house wiring. The XTBM was showing a burst of noise that lasted about 1 second and occurring every 5-6 seconds. I built a high pass coupler to use with my Fluke ScopeMeter (schematic shown below). The noise was a burst at 71Khz and around 500mv peak-peak. I traced the source to an ACP Back-UPS RS1500. When I unplugged the UPS the noise went away. However when I plugged the UPS back in to the 115 vac, the UPS began charging the battery and the noise frequency changed to 132Khz. The XTBM then reported an Insteon signal. I don't have Insteon equipment or this might a problem. In this case I may add a filter inside the UPS. The final report here is that I can find not communications coming from the new Smart Meter. With the RV power supply out and the UPS unplugged, the line is extremely clean even with the scope at 10mv/div. As for the RV power supply problem, it turns out that it goes into spuratic oscillations with a load of less than 1 amp.
Don
-
I've had Smarthome Filterlincs on my UPSes (well, the Belkin, APC, but NOT the one for the FiOS system) for long time. That was something I saw recommended here on the forums years ago.
-
I already have a very large inventory of ferrite cores, wire and capacitors. I won't even need to order anything if I install the filter inside the UPS, which is where it should have been in the first place. It doesn't take a very large inductor to filter out this high frequency component. A100uh inductor and 1uf capacitor would provide about 32db attenuation at 120Khz. This would reduce the 500mv P-P to less than 10mv. When ever possible, filters should be as close as possible to the switching power supply to reduce induced and radiated noise (EMI). Those wall clocks that update automatically use VLF radio signals from the atomic clock in Bolder Colorado.
-
I just read a post on CocoonTech regarding problems with UPB switches due to the utility company communicating with its smart meters. So the problem isn't confined to just X10.
Jeff
-
It's the "due to" part that concerns me.
Is it a result of scientific investigation or speculation due to the timing of the problem, as it was in my case?
Don
-
It sounds like a "do to" to me:
I have two clients who have a HAI system with HAI UPB switches. I'm not sure what revision switches they have either. The problem comes in with the local utility communicating with their meters over the powerline. Whenever this communication takes place, all of the HAI lights with flicker rapidly. The communication system is called Aclara.
Jeff
-
Aclara seems to have several systems but the one for smart metering doesn't seem likely to create problems for UPB.
- http://www.aclaratech.com/AclaraRF/Brochures/STAR_ElectricMTU.pdf
The DC pulses described in earlier posts might create problems for UPB which uses high amplitude pulses in their pulse position encoding scheme.
-
I agree that 450-470MHz is not a problem for any powerline control system. However, some of these smart meters communicate with a "data concentrator" over the utility feed using signals that can interfere with automation systems. The data concentrator then communicates with the utility network over RF.
Jeff
-
I already have a very large inventory of ferrite cores, wire and capacitors. I won't even need to order anything if I install the filter inside the UPS, which is where it should have been in the first place. It doesn't take a very large inductor to filter out this high frequency component. A100uh inductor and 1uf capacitor would provide about 32db attenuation at 120Khz. This would reduce the 500mv P-P to less than 10mv. When ever possible, filters should be as close as possible to the switching power supply to reduce induced and radiated noise (EMI). Those wall clocks that update automatically use VLF radio signals from the atomic clock in Bolder Colorado.
But wouldn't doing that void your warranty? ;)
-
What is a warranty? I buy most of my gadgets at the K6TRW ham swap meet in Redondo Beach, previously owned, no warranty. If I can't fix it myself, I don't buy it to begin with. That ACP UPS with a new battery cost me $40.00. It's not defective, it's just noisy by design. I bought 2 of them at that price and both have the same noise. Switch mode power supplies at light load are always a problem. My passive coupler helped but with all circuit breakers closed the X10 signal on the opposite phase is still marginal at 1.5 volts according to the XTBM. So I will be ordering an XTB-IIR Kit to replace my failed XPCR.
Don
-
What is a warranty?
Are you from X10? rofl
-
Is it me, or does there seem to be a concerted effort around here to dismiss these smart meters as a problem? Jeff has already documented PLC on 132kHz with Echelon meters. I'm happy others have found noisey UPS's or power supplies, but that's not the rest of us, especially those of us with Echelon meters... Oh, and before I hear about it, yes I'm fully aware of the scientific method. ;)
I have already disconnected all x10 transmitting devices. I have the pzz01 so hopefully that should be blocking "normal" external x10 signals. This happened after 17 years of no problems and started the day my meter was installed. While that may be "speculation due to timing of the problem", it's good enough for me. I still plan to scope my powerline and see what's going on...
Jeff
-
Is it me, or does there seem to be a concerted effort around here to dismiss these smart meters as a problem?
No - I think we are interested in finding whether or not they do cause problems and, if so, exactly how they do it. But, so far, there's no conclusive evidence, only speculation.
I've suspected the Echelon meters were causing problems for about 3 years. However, the problems I've seen were not with X-10 but with inexpensive appliances, two microwaves that had cost less than $100 each and a bargain basement refrigerator in the apartment I moved to in July have gone nuts since Echelon installed the meters in my area but I haven't discovered the cause and have been reluctant to speculate. Even now, I'm only seeing problems with RF control and only in the evenings when my upstairs neighbor is home.
Echelon's meter systems have been in use in Europe for several years with no apparent issues. LonWorks has been around for 20+ years and, as far as I know, coexisted peacefully with X-10. And there has not been a single report of problems on the Smarthome Insteon forum so I don't think a case has been made. Insteon uses 131.5kHz so the 132kHz should really clobber it but, if so, nobody has reported it.
Also, problems are being reported with several other smart meter systems. If they are, indeed, causing problems I would expect some there's some common feature that all use but, again, there's no evidence of widespread commonality with the exception of ZigBee and the DC pulses intended for third party displays/load-shedders. And, I have yet to see enough documentation of the specs to point to anything for certain although the DC pulses remain my favorite. They might explain why X-10 and UPB are affected but Insteon is not.
-
What is a warranty? I buy most of my gadgets at the K6TRW ham swap meet in Redondo Beach, previously owned, no warranty. If I can't fix it myself, I don't buy it to begin with. That ACP UPS with a new battery cost me $40.00. It's not defective, it's just noisy by design. I bought 2 of them at that price and both have the same noise. Switch mode power supplies at light load are always a problem. My passive coupler helped but with all circuit breakers closed the X10 signal on the opposite phase is still marginal at 1.5 volts according to the XTBM. So I will be ordering an XTB-IIR Kit to replace my failed XPCR.
Don
That's why I put the winking smiley at the end of my comment. I figured that the devices you were modifying were either well past their warranty phase, or you didn't care about the warranty.
I sure wish I knew a fraction of what you guys know about this stuff. My dad is an EE, and has always been a tinkerer (HAM license at age 12, fixing cars at age 16, etc), but only some of that rubbed off on me. I still need his help for just about any electronics projects. Maybe it isn't too late for me to learn some of this stuff?
-
This happened after 17 years of no problems and started the day my meter was installed. While that may be "speculation due to timing of the problem", it's good enough for me. I still plan to scope my powerline and see what's going on...
Smart Meters are not in our area yet, but we are with Duke Energy, so it can't be long. The trouble is, what do you do if a SM does wipe all X10 PLC? Since it is all contained in the homes wiring the FCC probably does't care. Duke doesn't care. etc.
And I wonder if a PZZ01 would actually solve. It's atteuation isn't that great.
Sigh....
-
I sure wish I knew a fraction of what you guys know about this stuff. My dad is an EE, and has always been a tinkerer (HAM license at age 12, fixing cars at age 16, etc), but only some of that rubbed off on me. I still need his help for just about any electronics projects. Maybe it isn't too late for me to learn some of this stuff?
I don't think it's ever too late now that we have the power of the internet. It sounds like your dad may have started without the internet. At 70, I'm still learning from the internet daily. Like, I just learned about reading those winking smiley things in a post.
Old Fart rofl
-
Smart Meters are not in our area yet, but we are with Duke Energy, so it can't be long. The trouble is, what do you do if a SM does wipe all X10 PLC? Since it is all contained in the homes wiring the FCC probably doesn't care. Duke doesn't care. etc.
And I wonder if a PZZ01 would actually solve. It's attenuation isn't that great.
I hope the XTB-ANR will be the solution. If not, I'll develop the Active Noise Eliminator, which should totally kill any noise that is not X10 (and possibly Insteon) at the distribution panel. That is a possible project for next summer.
One of my customers a year ago reported a serious problem after his utility company installed a smart meter. He installed the PZZ01. As I recall, it helped, but didn't solve all the problems. We tried pretty much everything, but he eventually threw in the towel entirely on X10. That is why I started working on ways to deal with powerline noise problems..
Jeff
-
I sure wish I knew a fraction of what you guys know about this stuff. My dad is an EE, and has always been a tinkerer (HAM license at age 12, fixing cars at age 16, etc), but only some of that rubbed off on me. I still need his help for just about any electronics projects. Maybe it isn't too late for me to learn some of this stuff?
I don't think it's ever too late now that we have the power of the internet. It sounds like your dad may have started without the internet. At 70, I'm still learning from the internet daily. Like, I just learned about reading those winking smiley things in a post.
Old Fart rofl
My dad's about the same age as you, so yes, he started way before Al Gore took credit for inventing the Internet.
I'm in my mid-30's, and I also remember what life was like before the Internet. Our first computer was an Apple ][, onto which my dad and brother added a 300 baud modem (which was faster than any of the BBSes at the time!).
-
It stopped raining in LA today, so I decided to go outside and get some real data in the circuit breaker panel. Armed with my XTBM and a BSR Command Console I proceeded as follows:
Used clip leads to connect the XTBM to each of the phases, one at a time of coarse, right at the main breaker.
Plugged the Command Console into an outlet a few feet away on the other side of the wall.
Connected my passive coupler to the load side of 2 side by side 15 amp lighting breakers (CB1 and CB2).
Turned off or unplugged as many things as I could find in the house.
Arranged two lamps, one on each phase, to be visible with both set to HC J and unit 2. These are feed from CB1 and CB2.
With only the main CB, CB1 and CB2 closed I observer a noise level of .03 on each of the phases. and around 4 volts of X10 signal on each of the two phases and both lamps were controllable.
As I started closing the remaining breakers, I observed a small reduction in the X10 signal strength that got progressively weaker with the closing of each breaker. No one circuit made a large change.
When the X10 signal at the main CB got down to around 1.5 volts, the control of the lamps became marginal and sometimes failed to control the lamp on the opposite phase. By the time all of the breakers were closed the X10 signals were down to 1.68 v and 0.98 v. The passive filter helped, but was still not enough to make the X10 reliable.
At that point I decided that I needed an XTB-IIR and placed my order.
Don
-
It stopped raining in LA today, so I decided to go outside and get some real data in the circuit breaker panel.
Your breaker box is outside? Doesn't that make it hard to keep it watertight?
-
I am finding it amazingly difficult to find any detailed technical documentation on the pulses intended for third party energy monitors.
I does look as if they are of 25mS or longer duration with the time between leading edges reflecting the energy used although I also found references to variable width pulses that reflect the energy used.
By and large, the pulses do not seem to be coupled to the powerline, instead being either an IR emitter pulse, a serial output or a pulsed relay. There's even one monitor that affixes to the meter face and counts disc rotations for older analog meters (a DIY version dates back 10+ years and was discussed on comp.home.automation).
However, I did find a reference that says, referring to pulsed relays ...
... some meters have one of the pulse output connectors connected to neutral ...
and that might be the mechanism that affects X-10 and UPB. See the Safety reference in this article...
- http://openenergymonitor.org/emon/node/79
-
WHAT....It never rains in Southern California, but when it does....... the cover is designed to keep rain out. They use a hinged door that is inserted beneath the upper panel where the meter is located forming a lip seal. It seems to work. No pun intended.
Regarding 25 ms pulses superimposed on the power circuit, it would not be possible to impose a single polarity pulse of this duration on the power circuit without saturating transformers on the line. A pulse of 25 ms would be almost the same as trying to put a direct current component on the alternating current source. This is why the power companies don't like you to run half wave rectified loads. With the old analog meters, a rectified half wave component would produce a braking (not breaking) force on the eddy current motor causing errors in the meter. I don't know what happens with the new smart meters under such conditions, but if a dc component is present, the power transformer will generate a reset current on the other half of the cycle. Transformers do not transform DC.
Therefore, any superimposed 25 ms pulses would need to be at some carrier frequency or of alternating polarity (AC) and not contain any DC component.
Don
-
I don't think the 25mS pulses are on the powerline. Anyway, I wouldn't know how to verify if they are. What I think might be happening is that the relay coil might be putting pulses of much shorter duration (inductive kickback?) on the powerline and spikes are a confirmed problem for X-10 and could be for UPB depending on timing. UPB discharges a capacitor to put a ~40V pulse on the line, the position of which contains their data.
-
I found the source of my RF problem and it had nothing to do with the Echelon meter nor the lady upstairs. It was
a dead an intermittent RR501 and it seemed to happen only in the evenings because that's when I usually turn the lights on in my BR. :-[
I have an RR501 and a mini-Timer on that phase and a TM751 on the other phase. The RR501 was working a couple of months ago when I first plugged it in so I never considered it until today when I decided to get to the bottom of it.
I suspect it may have been the cause of the few random ONs which were occurring a couple of weeks back but not since.
PS: Where's the sheepish grin icon?
-
I had an RR501 start doing strange things.
The power supply area of the PCB where the zener diode is located. Was black and the solder had started to look grainy.
I replaced the zener diode with two zeners each half the original voltage. In series and the main filter cap.
-
I found the source of my RF problem and it had nothing to do with the Echelon meter nor the lady upstairs. It was a dead RR501 and it seemed to happen only in the evenings because that's when I usually turn the lights on in my BR. :-[
I have an RR501 and a mini-Timer on that phase and a TM751 on the other phase. The RR501 was working a couple of months ago when I first plugged it in so I never considered it until today when I decided to get to the bottom it.
I suspect it may have been the cause of the few random ONs which were occurring a couple of weeks back but not since.
PS: Where's the sheepish grin icon?
Another one solved.
Okay, so do we still have who has problems they are attributing to their Smart Meter?
I don't see a sheepish grin icon, but the regular grin is: ;D .
-
Oooo! Me! Me! Me!! (Has hand held up...) ;)
Jeff
-
I found the source of my RF problem and it had nothing to do with the Echelon meter nor the lady upstairs. It was a dead an intermittent RR501 and it seemed to happen only in the evenings because that's when I usually turn the lights on in my BR. Embarrassed[/quote
Lets give him one "ata boy" and a +1 from me. #:)]
-
Oooo! Me! Me! Me!! (Has hand held up...) ;)
Jeff
Anyone BESIDES you? (just kidding ;) )
It is hard for me to keep track of who has which problems, and which ones were solved.
I'm sure our resident "geniuses" are still trying to help with this one.
-
There are two in the Cincinnati area w/Echelon meters and 2-3 others where the reports are indirect (email to Jeff Volp) and with different meters (IIRC).
And I'm not dismissing any of them - it's just extremely difficult to identify anything that all have in common. So far, I cannot find anything that definitively explains anything the various smart meters all have that might affect X-10 and UPB but not Insteon.
My favorite candidates are spikes and/or brownouts (i.e. momentary voltage dips) which are a known issue for X-10. Spikes could be a problem for UPB but I've never heard of them being a problem for Insteon. Some or all of the meters output pulses meant for third-party energy monitoring devices but how these are output differs - flashing LED, serial output, ZigBee, pulsed relay... None appear to directly put pulses on the power-line but some of the relays are connected to Neutral which might cause spikes/dips when the relay coil de-energizes (inductive kickback). Since the frequency of the pulses is tied to total energy use, that could account for the apparent randomness.
And, the fact that some of the victims are long-time X-10 users might also be meaningful as some of the vulnerabilities may have been addressed in later designs (it was just sloppy design).
I believe Jeff favors a different candidate.
Some meters send data over the powerline to an aggregator at the transformer. This might be leaking into the household wiring but, again, the details/mechanism are a mystery.
-
Oh, I wasn't trying to discount anyone's claims that their SmartMeters were causing problems. However, we have seen a few reports from users of OTHER issues they found (perhaps caused by the change to the SmartMeter, perhaps a coincidence), that the user was able to track down and resolve. Perhaps the SmartMeter (or the process of shutting off the power, and installing the new meter) is causing something in the home to act crazy, and produce noise or something along those lines.
The meter itself might still have been the catalyst, but that doesn't mean that it is time to give up trying to get the system working again.
-
And I'm not dismissing any of them - it's just extremely difficult to identify anything that all have in common. So far, I cannot find anything that definitively explains anything the various smart meters all have that might affect X-10 and UPB but not Insteon.
My guess at this time is communition back to the "data aggregator" using Lon Works. While developing the XTB-ANR I measured as little as 30mVpp at 120KHz injected directly onto the powerline as a CW signal blocked a nearby X10 appliance module from decoding X10 commands. Sensitivity degrades as the frequency deviates from the center of the passband, but there is still plenty of sensitivity at 115KHz for that to be a problem. Like I said earlier, a Maxi Controller mistuned to 130KHz was still working fine, so X10 modules might still be blocked by a strong 132KHz signal.
I am not sure of the details of the Insteon front end, but they may include AGC to raise their detection threshold above the Lon Works signal level. Or perhaps they have some means to discriminate between the two signals like a FM radio can lock to the stronger of two stations.
I received a message from one of the people having trouble with their smart meter:
“Mr. ------ says Duke will probably "lower the power" or drop me off the network and read our meter the old fashioned way. He says they are working on the problem internally.”
I communicated directly with that Duke engineer, and explained how X10 works. So this may be the first example of a utility company actually recognizing and trying to mitigate the problem.
Jeff
-
I communicated directly with that Duke engineer, and explained how X10 works. So this may be the first example of a utility company actually recognizing and trying to mitigate the problem.
Where is that engineer? I met the regional engineer responsible for Northern Kentucky about 3 years ago and he was very sharp (and helpful) but that was about another issue entirely. This area was a test area for the Echelon meters and, as I've noted all along, I cannot point a finger at the meter for any X10 issues though I suspect it might be related to some non-X10 woes.
In tests a few years back I found most X10 modules (I had no X10 switches) responded to 75-150kHz with some going even higher (I was injecting a fairly strong signal.) so I do not doubt that 132kHz would be a problem. But, I wonder how it leaks into the residence. Echelon would certainly have been aware that it would create X10 problems so would, I think, have blocked it from the residence. Also, any X10 residence would likely cause fits at the aggregator with X10 signals leaking in that direction.
Paul Beam (?) who designed the ESM1 also told me he had seen responses in the 75-150kHz range. I have a pre-Elk version of the ESM1 (Brian Karas was thinking of buying the rights and asked me to look at it.) which reads 10Vpp full-scale so it may not be sensitive enough to see a very low amplitude 132kHz signal but I see nothing on it.
If it is related to 132kHz, I still do not understand why Insteon appears immune at 131.5kHz. Nor does it explain non-Echelon meters where some X10 users also appear to have problems.
-
I am not sure of the details of the Insteon front end, but they may include AGC to raise their detection threshold above the Lon Works signal level. Or perhaps they have some means to discriminate between the two signals like a FM radio can lock to the stronger of two stations.
Actually, Insteon has much greater sensitivity (10mV) than this, but the fact that all of their devices are repeaters does mean they tend to saturate the "network" with a strong signal (3.2 Vpp into 5 Ohms) so that could explain their apparent immunity.
But, UPB uses a totally different signalling method. They discharge a capacitor to create a ~40V pulse with the pulse location in reference to ZC determining logic 0-bit or logic 1-bit.
-
Here is a detailed description of LonTalk 110kHz-140kHz operation.
- http://www.echelon.com/support/documentation/Manuals/transceivers/078-0175-01C.pdf
-
Here is a detailed description of LonTalk 110kHz-140kHz operation.
- http://www.echelon.com/support/documentation/Manuals/transceivers/078-0175-01C.pdf
I have the LonWorks transceiver manual, which covers the same material.
My customer is in Cincinnati, so that may be indeed the same Duke facility.
Jeff
-
My customer is in Cincinnati, so that may be indeed the same Duke facility.
But not the same regional engineer.
-
Given that the Echelon meter probably transmits to the data aggregator only sporadically, the fact that I see nothing on my ESM1 may not be significant.
My RR5x5 PCB is about to go to the board house. One of the things it can do is output the (optically isolated) 120kHz bursts for viewing on a 'scope. I can program a trigger on another output whenever there's activity and capture it on my 'scope. It should work equally well for the 115kHz and/or 132kHz used by Echelon.
I can probably even transmit a PLC command at the same time to see what happens.
I included this feature thinking it might sometimes aid in troubleshooting - I just did not anticipate it might be useful so quickly.
Hmmm, I wonder if I can make the data aggregator run backwards. :'
-
The mystery deepens...
I replaced the intermittent RR501 with an RCA version and all was OK for a day. Now the RCA transceiver has stopped responding to RF. I unplugged it to check the outlet and my Kill-A-Watt indicates ~121VAC with no apparent intermittentency. When I plugged the transceiver back in, it started working normally again.
I tried the original RR501 on the other phase. It would not respond to RF while a TM751 in the same outlet did.
At this point I'm still not at all sure this is related in any way to the Echelon meter - I'm not at all sure what is going on.
I do not have time to troubleshoot this right now. I have 14 different prototype PCBs going to the fabricator and need to concentrate on bills-of-material to be sure I have parts on hand to assemble a few when I receive them. Even the minimal physical activity required to troubleshoot the transceiver issue aggravates my spinal cord injury and I need to avoid that right now.
-
Here are a couple of updates from the fellow who reported problems after Duke Energy installed the Echelon meter:
Before the installation of the new Duke meter, we were experiencing about one X10 switching failure about every two or three weeks, considering all two dozen or so circuits under control. After the Duke meter installation we began having so many failures every day that many of the circuits were turned off or manually operated.
The two active filters from Jeff at JV Digital Engineering have been in service a little more than 24 hours. All circuits were returned to automatic operation about 18 hours ago. We have experienced one switching failure since then when a light that should turn on did not. It will be several days before we will know if the system is back to normal but it is definitely better. However, looking at the signal and noise levels I am surprised things seem to be working this well. If the JVDE filters continue to show promise we may make some changes at the distribution panel to make their installation permanent.
And another update:
Here is an update to my lengthy report four hours ago. In the last four hours we have had two more switching failures - one that turned on when it should not have when another circuit turned on, and another one about 15 minutes later that failed to turn on.
So, it looks like the XTB-ANR is helping, but things are not perfect yet.
Jeff
-
Jeff,
I'm in the same "Duke" area of Northern KY, Ohio (Cincinnati) as your other customer. Could you PM me the name/contact info of that engineer? I'm going through hoops with the first level support people at Duke and it's getting ridiculous at this point...
Thanks,
Jeff
-
BUMP... Any news on this? Jeff, any updates on the effectiveness of your filters? I spoke with the Duke engineer. They may take me and 4 neighbors (on the same transformer) off the grid. He indicated that they didn't think it was just the smart meters causing the problems, but the unit out on the transformer that gathers the usage data and then sends it on to Duke. He said that they swapped back in the old analog meter for a few customers with issues and it didn't help indicating it was the unit on the transformer causing the problems. All I know is I put a system in years ago to save me some $$$ by shutting off lights (occupancy and day/night sensors) and it's now costing me big bucks because I can't keep the damn lights off! I've got every wall switch in my home on x10, my HVAC system, and my irrigation system! I've had to disable x10 control of the HVAC and irrigation for obvious reasons... This just sucks big time...
Jeff
-
BUMP... Any news on this? Jeff, any updates on the effectiveness of your filters?
Not since the post I made on November 11. The fellow has been out of town. There are two more filters on the way to him that include the ability to reject Insteon transmissions. So they may help if it is 132KHz leaking through. Hopefully I will receive another report this weekend.
There was a recent report from one of the XTB-ANR beta testers in another thread:
http://forums.x10.com/index.php?topic=25126.msg143895#msg143895
The XTB-ANR kits are available now, with a special price for buying a pair. (The second one is essentially break-even for me.)
Jeff
-
I received some detailed data on the smart meter installation. The fellow in the Duke Cincinnati service area has a spectrum analyzer. With that he was able to see periodic bursts of 75KHz about once a minute.
Reading more about the LonWorks power line transceivers, 75KHz is an alternate frequency generated when the clock is 6.5536 MHz instead of 10.0 MHz. So I am fairly sure his meter is communicating by LonWorks.
What was disappointing was his measurements showed the attenuation from the XTB-ANR was not that significant – reducing the 75KHz from .5V to .3V. The reason for that is the source impedance of the LonWorks transceiver is only 1 ohm, and it can drive 1 amp peak to peak onto the power line. Another version of that transceiver can drive 2 amps peak to peak. The ANR was designed to deal with noise sources, not powerful transmitters like that.
I'm working on a modified version of my Tuned Signal Sucker severely reduce the level of that 75KHz signal. Hopefully we will have some results in a week or so.
Jeff
-
Interesting. 75kHz is a definite problem for X-10 and may even be what drove my cheap microwaves out of their minds.
Does the Duke engineer know how it is getting into the household wiring? Or what it's function is?
On the former, wouldn't a whole house blocking filter take care of it?
On the latter, I don't recall the details but there was discussion a few years back of methods for bypassing the distribution transformers for data transfers. Maybe the 75kHz bursts do that and are what carry the usage data to the substation.
The LonWorks system is widely used in Europe but they have far more houses per distribution transformer than we do in N. America so it may be that the aggregators are not as dense as here.
-
Jeff -
I don't have a SmartMeter (yet - we've been told they are coming to our area within a year or so), but I've been watching this thread.
I'm not sure which meters our local utility is installing (they have already started in the adjacent county, but that doesn't guarantee we will get the same ones), but I'm hoping that by the time they install it, most of these issues will have been ironed out (or a suitable workaround will have been found).
Keep up the good work!
-
Well, it looks like our utility (PEPCO) is installing meters from "Silver Spring Networks".
I don't know the model for sure, but I saw one photo (from a local article) of a Focus AXR-SD meter.
The user who started this thread reporting his system didn't work at all after one of their meters was installed (same model), but I couldn't find anything else on them. I didn't see a resolution to his issue, or if the problem was caused by the removal of his coupler or not.
PEPCO's website says the meters use 900MHz and 2.4GHz to transmit their data back to the utility, so I'm hoping that means they are not sending signals on the powerline itself (and therefore shouldn't be interfering with my system).
Does anyone have any other information on their meters, and what (if any) interference they may cause with my X10 installation?
-
As I noted before if BGE (Baltimore Gas & Electric) wants to install Smart Meters and cannot guarantee they won't block x10 signals, they don't get access to to my house (electric & gas meters are inside).
-
As I noted before if BGE (Baltimore Gas & Electric) wants to install Smart Meters and cannot guarantee they won't block x10 signals, they don't get access to to my house (electric & gas meters are inside).
Dan -
1) I don't know how that helps me (meter is outside).
2) I don't know about BGE, but I'm guessing they have a similar clause in their customer agreement as Pepco does - that failure to provide them access to the meter to work on it could result in them shutting off your power.
-
The 75KHz is being injected directly onto the powerline to communicate with the "data aggregator". There is nothing to stop it from coming into the house. He read .5V in his lab, which is a long run from the distribution panel. The X10 signal was .3V barefoot, and 2V with the XTB-IIR in service. Since the XTB-IIR hits the panel with 20-30Vpp, you can see that the 75KHz is probably over 5V at the panel.
I wonder about the effectiveness of the PZZ01 or Leviton 6284. I also thought about the ferrite "doughnuts", but they are most effective up in the megahertz region. But even adding a few ohms to the source impedance would help.
Jeff
-
I'm beginning work on a device that should eliminate the problem entirely. It will null out all but X10 signals (and possibly Insteon) at the distribution panel, and amplify valid X10 signals. So if a utility company drives any signal into the home, it will be totally cancelled. They will have to provide some isolation between the meter and the distribution panel if they don't want their own signal killed too. Unfortunately with my present workload, that is at least a year off.
Jeff
-
I just got off the phone with PEPCO (DC/Maryland).
They told me that the two meters they are installing in my area are the Landis+Gyr Focus AXR, and the GE 1210+C.
I don't see a GE 1210+C, but I see an I-210+C (understandable mistake). The GE looks to be a single-phase meter, so I'm guessing I'll be getting the AXR.
Other than the one post here, I haven't seen any other reports of X10 problems with it, which is a good sign.
However, they don't know when we will be getting the new meter. Their goal is to have the entire region done by the end of 2012.
-
As I noted before if BGE (Baltimore Gas & Electric) wants to install Smart Meters and cannot guarantee they won't block x10 signals, they don't get access to to my house (electric & gas meters are inside).
Dan -
1) I don't know how that helps me (meter is outside).
2) I don't know about BGE, but I'm guessing they have a similar clause in their customer agreement as Pepco does - that failure to provide them access to the meter to work on it could result in them shutting off your power.
If they shut off my power, I'll get a lawyer and sue them. Smart Meters are for the company, not the user.
-
If they shut off my power, I'll get a lawyer and sue them. Smart Meters are for the company, not the user.
Sounds like a plan!
-
A modified version of the Tuned Signal Sucker is on the way. It places a very heavy load on the 75KHz, but leaves the 120KHz virtually unchanged. Hopefully we will have further results over the weekend.
The customer pointed out that the 1 ohm output impedance of the Echelon transceiver not only produces a very powerful signal, but it will also seriously load down any X10 signals that occur while it is transmitting. Even the XTB-IIR was not designed to drive into a 1 ohm load, so this may be a difficult one to solve.
Jeff
-
...this may be a difficult one to solve.
Jeff -
I'm waiting to see what you come up with. You always seem to come up with really creative solutions to these types of problems (and then prefix them with "XTB-" ;) ).
-
I wonder about the effectiveness of the PZZ01 or Leviton 6284.
I've got one and it doesn't knock it down enough to eliminate the problems...
Jeff
-
I wonder about the effectiveness of the PZZ01 or Leviton 6284.
I've got one and it doesn't knock it down enough to eliminate the problems...
But maybe it will help with that 1 ohm source impedance that will be pretty difficult to deal with.
Jeff
-
...this may be a difficult one to solve.
Jeff -
I'm waiting to see what you come up with. You always seem to come up with really creative solutions to these types of problems (and then prefix them with "XTB-" ;) ).
I've got a computer spice simulation running for a noise eliminator. Unfortunately, the output driver (Elantec EL2009) appears to have been discontinued, and I have to find a currently available equivalent.
Jeff
-
... Unfortunately, the output driver (Elantec EL2009) appears to have been discontinued, and I have to find a currently available equivalent.
Or design your own... ;)
-
... Unfortunately, the output driver (Elantec EL2009) appears to have been discontinued, and I have to find a currently available equivalent.
Or design your own... ;)
Replacing an integrated circuit with dozens of discrete components is not cost effective.
Jeff
-
... Unfortunately, the output driver (Elantec EL2009) appears to have been discontinued, and I have to find a currently available equivalent.
Or design your own... ;)
Replacing an integrated circuit with dozens of discrete components is not cost effective.
Jeff
Sorry, it sounded like you only needed it to make a noise generator for testing. I figured "discrete components" would be a reasonable solution for a one-off application like that.
-
... Unfortunately, the output driver (Elantec EL2009) appears to have been discontinued, and I have to find a currently available equivalent.
Or design your own... ;)
Replacing an integrated circuit with dozens of discrete components is not cost effective.
Jeff
Sorry, it sounded like you only needed it to make a noise generator for testing. I figured "discrete components" would be a reasonable solution for a one-off application like that.
No, I need something for the "production" unit. I haven't been able to find anything available today that is as good as the EL2009. Here is a quote I found during my search:
"The long out of production EL2009 is the king of buffers."
And actually, I would like something a little better.
Jeff
-
Might this work?
- http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/buf634.pdf
-
Might this work?
- http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/buf634.pdf
I'm afraid not. I've searched all the normal manufacturer websites for something suitable. I should have a spec sheet coming from Intersil for a device that might do the job.
The problem is the smart meter "noise source" can have a 1 ohm output impedance, and will deliver 1 amp. And there is an alternate LonWorks transceiver that can deliver 2 amps. So it will take a real beefy driver to null out that signal. The EL2009 can drive 1 amp, but even that unit doesn't do well into the 1 ohm source impedance. From the TDK data sheets, it looks like a couple of the ferrite doughnuts over the power leads can add another ohm or two at 100KHz so something like the EL2009 can do the job.
Even though the EL2009 was discontinued a decade ago when Elantec was bought by Intersil, there are still some available in the "obsolete" market at about $30 a pop. But I would not rely on that source for a new product.
Jeff
-
Is there any way to isolate the signal, and keep it from coming into the house?
I'm sure a giant UPS would do it (use the utility power to keep some very large batteries charged, run everything off those), but would probably be expensive, and not very efficient.
I'm no engineer, but is there something that could be placed in-line (perhaps only on those circuits that need it) to block those type of signals? (just guessing here)
-
Is there any way to isolate the signal, and keep it from coming into the house?
Yes, but I don't think that is the plan here. I think the utility companies eventually want to control equipment in homes through their smart meters so they can turn off your A/C and other heavy loads during peak periods.
To prevent the signal from coming into the home, it would take two 200A notch filters tuned to the frequency of the meter. Think of two filters an order of magnitude bigger than the X10 XPF.
Something I recommended to another fellow who was dealing with an insurmountable noise problem was to take his X10 system private. Essentially, that would isolate all X10 circuits from the main distribution panel, and then use signal couplers between the isolated phases. Something like that may be feasible in smaller X10 installations.
Jeff
-
Something I recommended to another fellow who was dealing with an insurmountable noise problem was to take his X10 system private. Essentially, that would isolate all X10 circuits from the main distribution panel, and then use signal couplers between the isolated phases. Something like that may be feasible in smaller X10 installations.
Sounds like Lightolier's Compose system with its (expensive) firewalls.
-
A follow up on the BUF634:
That device is not included in my simulator's library, but I did a sim with the similar Harris HA-5002. Using a bank of 5 devices, a 10Vpp signal with 1 ohm source resistance is nulled to about 75mVpp. It takes some serious power to do that, but this appears to be a viable way to deal with the smart meter problem.
Jeff
-
A follow up on the BUF634:
That device is not included in my simulator's library, but I did a sim with the similar Harris HA-5002. Using a bank of 5 devices, a 10Vpp signal with 1 ohm source resistance is nulled to about 75mVpp. It takes some serious power to do that, but this appears to be a viable way to deal with the smart meter problem.
Jeff
See? I knew you could do it! ;)
Keep up the good work.
-
I hope those modified Tuned Signal Suckers will be sufficient. They are MUCH cheaper, and available now.
Jeff
-
I sincerely hope you can get what we all might eventually need to cope with Smart Meter noise.
-
In a report back on the TSS tuned to 75KHz, there have still been several missed commands and false actuations. Further monitoring of the powerline showed another signal at 86KHz, which is not now being attenuated by the TSS.
I am working on a dual-frequency design now that will attenuate both 75KHz and 86KHz. It can also be used to attenuate the 115KHz and 132KHz pair, which are the other LonWorks frequencies. However, because those are so close to the X10 120KHz, it will not be as effective at those frequencies.
Unfortunately, I think the only real solution will be the noise eliminator. Simulation shows that should do the job if located adjacent to the distribution panel.
Jeff
-
An update on the Noise Eliminator:
Simulations show something like this has real promise, and I was getting ready to order parts to build a prototype of the output stage. However, BUF634 is pretty expensive - about $10 each. And 4 or 5 would be needed on each phase to counteract the 1A drive capability of the LonWorks transceiver. With all the other components needed, an assembled unit will be in the $300 range.
While a unit like this should eliminate the smart meter problem and also null out in-home noise that reaches the panel, that may be more than most X10 users would be willing to spend for a solution.
Comments?
Jeff
-
Jeff -
I'm amazed that you haven't given up on this one yet (I'm the same way, though - I just can't let go of an unsolved puzzle).
I'm guessing that $300 might be too high for most X10 users, but perhaps there may be some users out there who would spend that much just to make their system work again.
If it were me, however, I would probably just take the money and invest in some other system (Insteon, Zigbee, etc).
-
I have not see any reports yet. But there is a good chance if it makes X10 unreliable. Insteon may also have a similar fate.
-
If it were me, however, I would probably just take the money and invest in some other system (Insteon, Zigbee, etc).
Yes, that is my concern. However, many of us have thousands of dollars invested in X10 compatible equipment (Leviton here), so preserving that investment may be worth it. If they slap a smart meter on our home, I'll build one up just for myself. That is why I am continue to pursue the design.
Jeff
-
I wonder if the power company would kick in money? They (through Lonworks) are now interfering with PLC communications which has been a standard since the 1980s. Naturally they won't care. So, we the consumer, need something to mess up their Lonworks communications. Once they have to send troubleshooters and meter readers to X10 homes, they may be more sympathetic. So we need something cheap that wipes out Lonworks. :'
-
So, we the consumer, need something to mess up their Lonworks communications. Once they have to send troubleshooters and meter readers to X10 homes, they may be more sympathetic. So we need something cheap that wipes out Lonworks. :'
Since the noise eliminator would null out the LonWorks signal at the distribution panel, it would probably render their communication inoperative too.
Just a high-power nulling amplifier is pretty simple, but what makes this more complicated is being able to handle X10 signals. A simple nulling amplifier would cancel X10 signals just like any other noise, so potential X10 signals must be decoded, validated, and then repeated with enough power to overdrive the incoming LonWorks signal.
Jeff
-
They (through Lonworks) are now interfering with PLC communications which has been a standard since the 1980s.
It has never been an official standard and has always had to share the powerline with all comers. There were commercially available wireless FM intercoms that used the powerline as far back as the early '60s as I personally installed one in a restaurant in Palo Alto, California, where there was no conduit between the maitre'd stand and kitchen, in 1962-63.
OTOH, if this makes the meter run backwards, it might pay for itself fairly quickly. :'
-
It has never been an official standard and has always had to share the powerline with all comers.
Yeah, I should have called it "the defacto standard" like Dave Rye does.
Maybe this is viewed by X10 as another nail in the X10 PLC coffin, along with switching power supplies and evil incandescent bulbs. Another reason to get out of the business.
-
Since the noise eliminator would null out the LonWorks signal at the distribution panel, it would probably render their communication inoperative too.
Just a high-power nulling amplifier is pretty simple, but what makes this more complicated is being able to handle X10 signals. A simple nulling amplifier would cancel X10 signals just like any other noise, so potential X10 signals must be decoded, validated, and then repeated with enough power to overdrive the incoming LonWorks signal.
Is the LonWorks signal continuous, or does it only come sometimes?
If it is intermittent, is there a way to listen for valid X10 codes, buffer them until the LonWorks signal is gone, and then retransmit?
-
Is the LonWorks signal continuous, or does it only come sometimes?
If it is intermittent, is there a way to listen for valid X10 codes, buffer them until the LonWorks signal is gone, and then retransmit?
I only have data from one smart meter installation. That meter is communicating at both 75KHz and 86KHz. The communication in this one instance is periodic. As I recall, it occurs about once a minute. I don't think he recorded how long each transmission is, but it is long enough to measure the frequency and amplitude on a spectrum analyzer.
These signal bursts are causing both the loss of X10 commands and unwanted actuations. I have seen noise morph one command into another, so that may be what is happening here with the unwanted actuations.
A "polite" controller may be able to recognize the corrupted commands and retransmit. That should help with lost commands, but may not help with unwanted actuations.
It may be feasible to build a repeater that could recover a X10 signal buried in the meter transmission, and retransmit that when the line has cleared. However, that opens the door for all sorts of unexpected results if the smart meter transmits in the middle of a sequence of commands.
I think the only real solution here is to somehow eliminate the smart meter signal from propagating into the home.
Jeff
-
It was a crazy idea, but I don't really know how these things work in the first place.
Would something in-line between the meter and the breaker box be able to filter out the noise easier? Like a step-down transformer, but not actually stepping down?
-
Would something in-line between the meter and the breaker box be able to filter out the noise easier? Like a step-down transformer, but not actually stepping down?
Yes, a filter between the meter and the distribution panel could block the signal. One of my customers had a PZZ01 installed. As I recall, it helped, but didn't entirely solve the problem. An in-line filter would typically have to handle 200 amps, and might be pretty large. Think of a 2-phase version of the XPF that could handle 10 times the current.
But as I said in a prior post, I think the utility companies want this signal to intrude into our homes because the eventual intent is for them to be able to shut down our major electrical appliances during peak demand so they do not need to provide on-line reserve generating capacity.
Jeff
-
Well I was working around the house this morning ( inside as it's 20 degrees outside) and wham the lights went out. I heard noise outside and went out to find the worker swapping out the meter.
Aside from cleaning off some grease? :( on the painted panel below it, so far so good. I don't have a huge setup, but Remotes, Macros, etc.
seem to be working.
Or do problems have yet to arise?
Of course I had to go around and reset the usual things and for measure I reloaded the interface.
I'm in So-Cal, (Edison) so if any impromptu notes are being compiled about the meters being installed let it be known and I will post any info I can find on it. G.
-
Would something in-line between the meter and the breaker box be able to filter out the noise easier? Like a step-down transformer, but not actually stepping down?
Yes, a filter between the meter and the distribution panel could block the signal. One of my customers had a PZZ01 installed. As I recall, it helped, but didn't entirely solve the problem. An in-line filter would typically have to handle 200 amps, and might be pretty large. Think of a 2-phase version of the XPF that could handle 10 times the current.
But as I said in a prior post, I think the utility companies want this signal to intrude into our homes because the eventual intent is for them to be able to shut down our major electrical appliances during peak demand so they do not need to provide on-line reserve generating capacity.
Jeff
As I understand it, the PZZ01 sits around the neutral wire, and inductively senses the signals to block, then injects the opposite signal to the powerline to cancel it out.
I'm thinking more along the lines of disconnecting the lines coming into the panel, hooking them to this "black box," and then connecting the "black box" to the breaker box. Whatever is inside that box would isolate the power lines from the other side.
Doesn't a standard step-down transformer isolate the power? Isn't that why PLC signals don't pass beyond the pole transformer?
If the stepping-down is done by the ratio of windings on one side to the other, then wouldn't an equal number of windings on both sides keep the voltage the same, yet still isolate the noise?
-
Well I was working around the house this morning ( inside as it's 20 degrees outside) and wham the lights went out. I heard noise outside and went out to find the worker swapping out the meter.
What brand and model of meter did they install?
-
As I understand it, the PZZ01 sits around the neutral wire, and inductively senses the signals to block, then injects the opposite signal to the powerline to cancel it out.
I'm thinking more along the lines of disconnecting the lines coming into the panel, hooking them to this "black box," and then connecting the "black box" to the breaker box. Whatever is inside that box would isolate the power lines from the other side.
Doesn't a standard step-down transformer isolate the power? Isn't that why PLC signals don't pass beyond the pole transformer?
If the stepping-down is done by the ratio of windings on one side to the other, then wouldn't an equal number of windings on both sides keep the voltage the same, yet still isolate the noise?
I did discuss an in-line filter above. A transformer would also provide the isolation, but it would be even larger and more expensive than a 200A in-line filter. Think about the 60Hz transformers that were in old tube-type TV sets. They were rated about 300 watts. A transformer for an entire home would have to handle 48,000 watts (240V x 200A). That would be enormous and EXPENSIVE. Even an in-line filter would have huge inductors to handle the 200A.
While the concept behind the PZZ01 may be viable here, it probably doesn't work well because the LonWorks transceiver is very powerful.
Test results from the TSS notch filters has not been that promising, but that may be due to line inductance. Even a few feet of wire between the filters and the distribution panel can have enough inductance to reduce their effectiveness. I hope the customer can re-run the test with the filters located directly adjacent to the panel to cancel out as much line inductance as possible.
Jeff
-
But as I said in a prior post, I think the utility companies want this signal to intrude into our homes because the eventual intent is for them to be able to shut down our major electrical appliances during peak demand so they do not need to provide on-line reserve generating capacity.
As more and more utilities move to solar and wind supplies, they also encounter another problem which is somewhat the opposite of reducing peak demand.
- http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/05/business/energy-environment/as-wind-energy-use-grows-utilities-seek-to-stabilize-power-grid.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=taming%20wind%20wald&st=cse
-
A transformer for an entire home would have to handle 48,000 watts (240V x 200A). That would be enormous and EXPENSIVE. Even an in-line filter would have huge inductors to handle the 200A.
I never said it was a GOOD idea, or a cheap one.
I was just wondering if it would work (in theory, at least). ;)
-
Meter picture
-
There is nothing to stop it from coming into the house. He read .5V in his lab, which is a long run from the distribution panel. The X10 signal was .3V barefoot, and 2V with the XTB-IIR in service.
Your mention of the Duke engineer's lab joggled a few dormant brain cells and I recalled this...
- http://www.smartmeters.com/the-news/142-duke-energy-unveils-technology-centre.html
If the Duke engineer you are communicating with has his lab there, it's only 2-3 miles from me. If so, I can help should he need a real-world test site.
-
If the Duke engineer you are communicating with has his lab there, it's only 2-3 miles from me. If so, I can help should he need a real-world test site.
Actually, that is my customer who has been doing all the testing. The 75KHz notch has helped, but has not entirely solved the problem. More "BareBones" PCBs should be here tomorrow night to add a second notch for the 86KHz. Duke offered to pull the smart meter off his home, which may be the final solution.
Jeff
-
The Duke engineer told me thet the problem was NOT with the smart meters. They have actually removed some of them and the X10 problems persisted. He said the PLC was coming from the data aggregator (communications node) out at the transformer. That's what talks to the meters and then relays via cell back to Duke. Removing the meter alone does not fix the problem. They have to turn the aggregator off too...
I quoted the above from the Smart Meter Survey, moving it here to avoid cluttering that thread with comments.
It might be helpful to know the Aggregator make/model/specs to see whether reports of problems with non-Echelon smart meters might be related to the same Aggregator.
It would also be helpful to know whether any logging application logged X10 commands at the time of the random ONs (in the above case, JeffreyB's Ocelot did NOT log any).
The Echelon Smart Meters are used by every customer of the largest electric utility in Italy without apparent X10 issues.
-
I have some additional information from the customer I am working with in Cincinnati. He saw both the 75KHz and the 86KHz frequencies. One appears to be from the data aggregator, and the other from the smart meter. He is using two notch filters now that should be attenuating both frequencies. However, the tuning may not be optimal because it can be effected by line inductance. I have parts coming in to build another version that should be more immune to line inductance.
The last report I received from him was that there had been no X10 failures for 16 hours since the installation of the notch filters. I think we are approaching a viable solution.
Jeff
-
I have some additional information from the customer I am working with in Cincinnati. He saw both the 75KHz and the 86KHz frequencies. One appears to be from the data aggregator, and the other from the smart meter. He is using two notch filters now that should be attenuating both frequencies. However, the tuning may not be optimal because it can be effected by line inductance. I have parts coming in to build another version that should be more immune to line inductance.
The last report I received from him was that there had been no X10 failures for 16 hours since the installation of the notch filters. I think we are approaching a viable solution.
Jeff
How are the "notch filters" installed?
-
How are the "notch filters" installed?
It is a simple plug-in module a little smaller than the X10 XPPF. To reduce the SmartMeter signals, plug one into each phase as close to the panel as possible.
Jeff
-
That sounds simple enough. :)%
-
I just went out to the transformer and got the info off of the "data aggregator":
Ambient
Model X-3100-GB1
Jeff
-
I just went out to the transformer and got the info off of the "data aggregator":
Ambient Model X-3100-GB1
Here is a snippet from an article I picked off the web:
"Duke is using its SGIG funds to modernize communication between distribution lines and the company's back office. In the Cincinnati area, it is installing Ambient nodes alongside every transformer. Both smart meters and digital monitors on distribution lines send information via the power line to the box, which relays it to the Duke offices over a mesh wireless network. The company is testing an Ambient communication node, and Echelon's Edge Control Node 7000 series, for this purpose."
Jeff
-
Echelon also has the "NES Data Concentrator" which looks like the ones in some of the pics sent by others. I have not spotted the one for my current apartment but where I was living, it was on a pole (easy to spot because of a bright blue LED) and looked like the Echelon version.
Also, I had found all of the different meters from various suppliers confusing but it is beginning to appear that most, if not all, are actually using LonTalk but referring to it by its ISO, ANSI or CE standard designation. Echelon's data concentrator also uses it. The meters and concentrators use Cenelec A Band (75-86kHz) or C Band (115-132kHz) for the powerline protocol and the signal amplitude varies, growing considerably stronger if it encounters "noise". The concentrator can be set to query the meter (for usage) on 5 minute to 24 hour intervals. There's an optional SO (?) pulse output which can be RS232C, a set of XYZ relay contacts or flashing LEDs. The pulse rate is 1 pulse = 1 Watt hour (i.e. 1000 pulses per 1kWh). A Zigbee module is also optional.
One affected user sees random ONs with an X10-made switch but not from a Smarthome Insteon/X10 module set to the same address and sees no valid X10 codes in an Ocelot log. Another sees randon ONs in one X10-made module but not in another X10-made module at the same address.
While Cenelec A or B frequencies can block (interfere with) X10, I think it may be high amplitude signals operating directly on the PIC processors used by X10 (although I'm unsure of the mechanism) that cause the random ONs. Power surges, spikes and brownouts can cause similar events.
-
Well, the Ambient node was turned off two days ago. All false "ON"s have ceased. I also am not getting any blocked commands. Proof enough for me! I'm not sure how long Duke will be able to keep me "off the grid", so there still needs to be some long-term fix...
Jeff
-
I have been working with a customer in the Duke Cincinnati service area to come up with a viable solution. His last report was that there had been no switching errors for four days.
We are using a combination of clamp-on ferrite filters over the service entrance lines and X10 bandpass and low-impedance notch filters to attenuate the incoming smart meter signal.
The clamp-on ferrite filters are not easy to obtain, and I am in the process of ordering a batch. I am working with him now to come up with an optimum design for the notch filter. The first version was too susceptible to being detuned by powerline inductance.
Simulations on the noise eliminator that I had proposed some time ago were promising. It would cancel any powerline noise at the distribution panel, and repeat valid X10 signals at a high level. Unfortunately, it looks like that would be too expensive to produce
Jeff
-
Given that JeffreyB had an Insteon/X10 module on the same X10 address and it did not experience random ONs while his X10 switch did, I wonder if the random ON (and maybe OFF) might be fixed by disabling local control on the switches (and modules) that experience random ONs. Blocked commands might be alleviated if Duke could be persuaded to reduce the frequency of the concentrator queries of the meter.
-
Given that JeffreyB had an Insteon/X10 module on the same X10 address and it did not experience random ONs while his X10 switch did, I wonder if the random ON (and maybe OFF) might be fixed by disabling local control on the switches (and modules) that experience random ONs. Blocked commands might be alleviated if Duke could be persuaded to reduce the frequency of the concentrator queries of the meter.
I don't know if it is the local control that is the issue, since that generally watches the "load" side of the module.
When I had the issue with my neighbor's bad CFL, I had both X10 and Insteon devices, and only the Insteon ones were having issues. the X10 ones seemed to be fine.
It was attributed to the different sensitivity levels in the different devices.
-
I have Duke Energy in Cincinnati, and after the install if the Echelon Smart meter, my X10 modules come on at random times. It also happens for my Dad, so I know it is occurring. I have read through the forum, has anyone found a good cheap solution to fix? Do you think calling Duke would do any good at all? I assume if I call their customer service they won't have a clue as to what I am talking about or blame it on my equipment that has been fine for 5+ years.
Thanks,
-Mike
-
We have made significant progress addressing the smart meter problem at one home in the Duke Cincinnati service area. That meter interacts with its data accumulator at 75KHz and 86KHz. When first installed it rendered the X10 system in that home virtually unusable. We have since progressed to the point that there have been several days without a problem.
The solution has been to install clamp-on ferrite filters over both “hot” service entrance cables to add some impedance to the smart meter signals, and then to add a low-impedance filter to severely attenuate whatever signals leak through. We are still working on an optimum filter, but good results have been obtained with the X10 XPNR straddling the incoming 240V, and low-impedance 86KHz notch filters across both phases. It is essential for the clamp-on ferrites to be installed to add some impedance for either of those filters to be effective.
We have done a lot of research on clamp-on ferrite filters. We are now using the RFC-20MA from Intermark. While most of the clamp-on filters are targeted at blocking noise in the megahertz region, these Intermark filters have a low-frequency material that is effective in the range of interest. They are expensive though. I have some on order now, and will be adding them to my product list when they arrive. The exact price depends on how much it costs to ship them to me, but they should be less than $18 each. A minimum of one must be installed on each entrance cable, but we will be testing with multiple filters when this lot comes in.
We will also be testing a new wide-bandwidth attenuator in about a week. Parts for that are on the way now.
Hopefully we will have a final solution to those of you plagued with this problem in another couple of weeks.
Jeff
-
It is too bad that the responsibility for solving this falls to the homeowner (and their friends), and not to the utility company. After all, THEY are the ones that created the problem by installing the new meter in the first place.
-
I have also opened a case with Duke in Cincinnati. Not sure if I'll get anywhere, but I figured it could not hurt.
-
Mike (zekyl314),
PM me with your contact info and I'll pass it on to the Duke engineer I'm dealing with. It will then be up to him whether he contacts you, but he's been very responsive for me.
Jeff
-
Jeff, message has been sent to you.
-Mike
Mike (zekyl314),
PM me with your contact info and I'll pass it on to the Duke engineer I'm dealing with. It will then be up to him whether he contacts you, but he's been very responsive for me.
Jeff
-
I have had communication with a Duke engineer in Cincinnati. My customer in that service area is also working directly with them. We will be sharing our results with them with the hope that Duke will address it from their end.
Jeff
-
I posted an update on the smart meter problem here:
http://forums.x10.com/index.php?topic=26056.msg146781#msg146781
As yet, nobody has contacted me regarding the solution. While I have already invested hundreds of dollars on the clamp-on ferrite filters (which must be purchased directly from the manufacturer), I won't order components for the filters if there is no interest in this solution.
Jeff
-
Jeff,
have you passed on your results to the Duke engineer Paul? I would think that a working solution would interest them and could possibly make you a few bucks. Duke could offer this as their solution. I'm still of the mind that the home owners should not foot the bill for this Duke induced problem. Right now my solution was to have them take me off the grid and it didn't cost me a cent. How long they'll keep me off is not known...
Jeff
-
have you passed on your results to the Duke engineer Paul?
No, I had not contacted Duke directly because my customer was in close contact with them, but I will do so now.
FYI, I added a Smart Meter Rejection kit to the XTB Ordering page. I only have components for a few of the kits because the ferrite filters are on backorder. I also have not ordered the components for my own custom filter because there has been no interest at all in the fix.
Jeff
-
Good, when (and If BGE (Baltimore Gas Electric) starts converting to Smart Meters, I'll be ordering one.
-
Good, when (and If BGE (Baltimore Gas Electric) starts converting to Smart Meters, I'll be ordering one.
You might want to wait and see if they cause any problems first. It is a lot of money to spend on something you might not need.
-
You might want to wait and see if they cause any problems first. It is a lot of money to spend on something you might not need.
The fix should also prevent neighbor's noisy CFLs from affecting your X10 systems. ;)
BTW, those special low-frequency clamp-on ferrite filters cost about 15 bucks each.
Jeff
-
You might want to wait and see if they cause any problems first. It is a lot of money to spend on something you might not need.
The fix should also prevent neighbor's noisy CFLs from affecting your X10 systems. ;)
BTW, those special low-frequency clamp-on ferrite filters cost about 15 bucks each.
Jeff
Jeff - I know it isn't a HUGE amount of money, and I'm sure it is well-worth the investment if you have a SmartMeter that is causing problems with your system. However, if you don't have a problematic SmartMeter (we have reports of other makes/models NOT causing problems), then why spend the money?
-
Noam,
You misunderstood me. I am not advocating installing the kit unless someone indeed has a problem with signals coming in over their powerline. I was just trying to point out that the kit will not only help with a smart meter, but it will also help block signals coming in from other sources too.
Since I don't make the clamp-on filters or the XPNR, I get very little out of making it available. The filters are not available through a distributor, and they cost about $15 each with shipping in a lot of 20 (the smallest quantity they sell).
Jeff
-
Jeff -
I certainly didn't think you were suggesting people buy stuff they don't need (you're so humble, you don't even push YOUR products, even when the need for them is so obvious!), I'm sorry if my earlier post came across that way.
I wonder if your clamp-on filter solution would have helped me a few years ago with the problems I had from my neighbor's bad CFL. Of course my solution (buy him a pair of new $7 bulbs) was probably cheaper. ;)
-
I wonder if your clamp-on filter solution would have helped me a few years ago with the problems I had from my neighbor's bad CFL.
Since measurements show the ferrite filters reduce the powerful smart meter signal down to a very low level, they would also be effective blocking other noise too. The configuration of the shunt filter would depend on what type of noise is causing the problem.
Jeff
-
with the interest in smart meters, this link may be of interest to some... 3 pages of posts....
http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=143299&page=3