X10 Community Forum
🖥️ActiveHome Pro => ActiveHome Pro General => Help & Troubleshooting => Topic started by: carmine pacifico on April 21, 2005, 11:11:58 PM
-
What I do not understand is why you need <BR>X10 to add the V572 to AHP? I believe you <BR>can use it as is: The V572 broadcast any <BR>RF signal it receives (any house code) <BR>trough the power line; If you have a <BR>motion detector programmed for F1, the <BR>CM15 will get F1 On/Off from power line, <BR>therefore is you use F1 On/Off as a <BR>trigger it will work; AHP is designed to <BR>be very user friendly, so friendly that <BR>some of �Conditions� can be confusing to a <BR>programmer but easy to a non programmer, <BR>AHP does not need to know about the V572 <BR>for the V572 to work, if you need to block <BR>some house code use the software that <BR>comes with the V572, It�s a small <BR>inconvenience but it works, AHP can not <BR>possibly activate or deactivate house <BR>codes in the V572 unless the V572 is <BR>connected to the computer via serial port, <BR>to much of an effort to reproduce <BR>something that is already supplied with <BR>the V572. Unless you enjoy reprogramming <BR>motion detectors, you will not need to <BR>change house code very often. <BR>If you block RF house code at the V572, <BR>there will be no traffic on the power line <BR>from the blocked RF code; instead if you <BR>block at the CM15a, any RF signal from the <BR>blocked house code will still be present at <BR>the power line. <BR>Let�s not forget that the CM15a has total <BR>control of it�s own RF transceiver, but <BR>cannot directly control an external <BR>transceiver.
Fix for RF on the CM15A immediately (http://www.x10community.com/forums/index.php?topic=4232.msg30770#msg30770)
Re: Fix for RF on the CM15A Immediately [3 of 3] (http://www.x10community.com/forums/index.php?topic=12383.msg31026#msg31026)
[TTA Edit: Experiment to determine whether or not SPLITTING 'Highly-Viewed' / 'Highly-Replied' but currently
INACTIVE threads from LONG, LONG AGO (I'm starting with ~2 years) into parts will allow current
ACTIVE threads to appear in the Top 10 Topics (by Replies) section of the
Statistics Center (aka More Stats) (http://www.x10community.com/forums/index.php?action=stats) Page.
NOTE: I *WILL* address the <BR> problem...]
-
X10Pro:
Tony's Request sounds good How abut it?:
"X10 Pro: Sounds like “helpful Hints” and
GeorgeP may have a viable interim
solution. It looks good to me. Just add a
V572AB to the modules templates in AHP and
auto disable RF on CM15A. It is now
April 19 more than 2/3 of a year and no
solution for the RF or even an
acknowledgement that it will be fixed. We
really do need to move on. So how about
adding the V572AB (includes the PSC05 or
TW523) in Modules under Other with only
Receive RF disabled at the CM15A?"
-
X10 Pro:
How about an answer its been over 24 hours
and you have answered posts much later than
that?
-
X10 Pro:
Hello is there an X10 Pro anywhere?
-
X10 Pro staff is to busy working on next
update, guaranteed to be as good as the
last one
-
I don't think we'll be adding the V572AB. I'm
sure people who buy them know enough to set
the transceiver configuration in AHP on their
own.
-
X10 Pro:
When is the RF going to be fixed on CM15A.
-
The heck with "when" - does X10 have a plan
to address the RF range issues? IF so, what
is the plan, if not, why not?
-
X10 Company:
ARF1410 has posed a fair and reasonable
question below and deserves an answer
directly. If there is a problem with that
he and others on this forum have a vested
right to know.
-
Best I can gather, at least on these forums,
X10 has never acknowledged there is an RF
problem that needs to be fixed, so I have
another question for X10 -
What is considered "acceptable" or "spec" rf
range for this product?
-
Because RF is so susceptible to environmental
factors, there aren't minimum numbers that
apply to everyone. The design of the antenna
and RF system of the CM15A should produce the
same or better performance as other X10
transceivers. Because the CM15A does
collision detection, it may behave a little
differently than other transceivers in the
presence of powerline noise or other
transmissions.
The fact that the CM15A is used next to the
PC can also create problems for RF
performance, since computers often put out rf
on the same frequencies used by X10 devices,
and the general level of rf noise can be
high. And, rf noise or other signals can be
coupled onto the USB connection, making the
interference impossible to avoid.
-
Hi all,
My two cents worth.
The antenna on the CM15A is too small.
If the info I have is correct, the RF
signals are in the 433Mhz range. That would
make a full wafelength at about 70cm, a half
wave about 35cm.
The TM751 has 29cm antenna that could easily
be tuned to 35cm electromically.
The CM15A has a much smaller antenna located
near (rf) noisy computers. That may be the
only reason behind poor RF performance.
Ken
-
Having read all of this...
Does the FCC prohibit an external antenna on
X10 devices. A five to fifteen foot coax
with an efficient antenna might solve a lot
of problems, as far as the reception goes.
Think about it.
V/R
Ken Miller
-
Ken: X10 RF devices in the US are 310MHz. The
antenna in the CM15A is the right length,
it's just not all visible (there's more
antenna wire inside the interface). I'm not
sure what FCC restriction might apply, but I
can find out.
-
X10 Pro - You have not answered the basic
question - Does X10 Feel there is a RF
problem that X10 needs to fix? Lets begin
with a simple YES or NO...
-
Hi,
OK, 310mhz, very roughly is a wavelength of
one meter. The Rest is math.
The the antenna is tucked up in side the
CM15A. Is it a base loaded coil arrangement?
I read that all of the antenna stuff was in
there and us neoyphites should stand in awe.
ken
-
Hi,
This is a interesting thread.
I like the X10 stuff that I have had for the
past twelve years.
Ken
-
X10 Company & X10 Pro:
What you are attempting to represent about
the RF interference by computers does not
explain the CM15A being placed next to the
TM751 and UX23A in a previously existing
application (no computers near) and
demonstrating CM15A with less then 60% range
of those two devices. The testing was quite
thorough and there were no computers next to
them and the CM15A demonstrated that it
could not BY A LONG SHOT accommodate an
EXISTING X10 APPLICATION. The key point is
unplug a UX23A from an existing X10
application and plug in CM15A (INTO THE SAME
PLUG) and the RF disappears swap back and
its back!
This in great detail was reported to you and
AHP Support via e-mail a number of times by
me. So what you are saying is an inaccurate
assessment of the real problem and I believe
you know it.
So back to my original request: ARF1410 has
posed a fair and reasonable question below
and deserves an answer directly. If there
is a problem with that he and others on this
forum have a vested right to know the truth.
-
We do not feel that there is fundamental
hardware RF problem that we need to fix. I do
know that individual users have had problems,
and I'm not denying that.
-
Has X10 done a simple, side by side test to
show that the CM15A has same RF receiving
range as the other X10 RF modules(rr505?
751?)?
-
ARF1410:
You now have X10 Company's direct unabridged
answer.
How does that grab you?
-
I think it is good that we have a direct
answer from X10Pro for the question. I do
not use the CM15A RF receiver at all (in
fact I don't use the CM15A at all now, as it
is awaiting replacement), and only use the
RF transmit for one daily command, so I
haven't directly experienced the rf range
problems that people seem to have. So my
question for X10 Pro and forum users is that
have people actually installed a CM15A and
RR501 (isn't that the "good" X10 receiver?)
at the same loaction to actually verify, in
a test setup, that the range is
substantially less for the CM15A?
-
Part of the problem is the CM15a needs to be in three places at once:
1. For connection to the computer it should be close to the PC,
2. For optimal powerline transmission it should be as close to the breaker panel as possible (optimally on its own circuit), and
3. For optimal RF reception, it should be in the centre of the house at a high elevation far from any source of RF noise.
For many users location 1 is only necessary when programming the CM15a. An interface that has a longer range than USB (such as Ethernet) would solve this.
Location 2 is not crucial since you can make do with a phase coupler and strategically placed noise filters.
Location 3 is key! The best solution for this is to have a detachable antenna that uses an F connector so that an existing run of coax could be used. The antenna could be designed to attach directly to the CM15a without needing a separate mounting bracket for those who want to keep it attached. The extra parts needed would probably only add about a dollar or two to the manufacturing cost.
This may only be part of the problem. Another theory has surfaced here that the processor is too slow and when it gets overburdened it has troubles processing RF commands received. I also don’t buy the argument that coiling up the last few centimetres of the antenna has no effect on reception. I read about one user who greatly improved his range by uncoiling the antenna.
-
ARF1410
My CM15a had mind of it’s own regarding
range, final test before I got fed up and
returned the piece of junk was to erase all
memory and use it as transceiver I got
range over 40ft trough 3 walls, but it was
unpredictable, in many occasions it would
miss the RF signal, all this was monitored
with a CM11a connected to another computer.
I believe the RF receive has adequate
range, but the CPU inside the CM15a It’s
not powerful enough even when used as a
transceiver.
I have been using the 1132CU from smart
home with rr501 transceiver for a while
now; same location, never missed a beat;
you can pretty well set it and forget it.
The only thing I found wrong with the
1132CU, the Smarthome forums are very
boring, very little activity, and all good.
-
Carmine -
If we cleared the memory and maybe put in
just a single lamp module (or even just
activity monitor with Cm11A) we should be
able to test receiving range by using some
type of handheld X10 remote, without any
concern of processor speed issues affecting
our test, shouldn't we?
-
There is a project on AccessX10 that shows
how to add an external antenna to the CM15A.
Has anyone tried it and has anyone gotten
better results. If so, doesn't that prove
the point about an external antenna?
Also, I agree with X10 that the V572AB
doesn't need to be added to AHP. RF can
just be turned off manually.
The idea about ethernet for the connection
would be excellent. I have my whole house
wired for ethernet and could find many
places to tuck the CM15A out of the way.
-
Don't hold your breath for Ethernet support
out of the CM15A. If Carmine is right it
would saturate the microprocessor. Besides
X10 doesn't have the patent on Ethernet so
its probably not enough profit. And you
heard their representative, it’s not how the
product performs it is how they, X10, FEEL
about it. Nice don’t even need any
technical specifications that way. Did I
just hear a gavel tap? :--\
George P: By the way how is that CM15A with
V572AB for RF performing?