duplicate commands with multiple transceivers

[bcboy@thecraftstudio.com]

I've read the bit about multiple transceivers here:
http://www.mbx-usa.com/multiples.htm. I'm using two RR501s, one X10
branded, one IBM branded, on the same house code, and I see duplicate
dim commands on unit 5. I haven't tested other codes, but this seems to
contradict the information on that page.

[Dave Houston]

That page was rewritten (obviously, too quickly) from a much, much longer
original and there is a mistake in that section. You will see duplicates for
all commands.

bcboy@thecraftstudio.com wrote:

>I've read the bit about multiple transceivers here:
>http://www.mbx-usa.com/multiples.htm. I'm using two RR501s, one X10
>branded, one IBM branded, on the same house code, and I see duplicate
>dim commands on unit 5. I haven't tested other codes, but this seems to
>contradict the information on that page.

[bcboy@thecraftstudio.com]

I just verified that the 501s were on opposite phases. I was getting
ready to put them on the same phase to see if it made any difference
when I found that this morning I'm not seeing duplicates. Heh. I love
x10. I never know what it's going to do.

In theory should putting them on the same phase solve the issue? I was
thinking of getting a V572A and putting two antennas on it. It's more
than I want to spend, but I can't afford much more debug time on the
501s.

I thought that perhaps some 220V device was on last night, causing the
signal across the phases to be stronger. But I can't actually identify
any such device.

[bcboy@thecraftstudio.com]

Oops. I didn't realize this was a sore topic. I just googled for V572.
Yikes. Forget I mentioned it.

[Dave Houston]

bcboy@thecraftstudio.com wrote:

>Oops. I didn't realize this was a sore topic. I just googled for V572.
>Yikes. Forget I mentioned it.

It's still illegal. ;)

[Dave Houston]

Duplicate commands are inherent, independent of phase. They occur because
the RR501 has collision avoidance. It senses the other signal, stops, then
sends its signal once the line is clear. So any signal heard by both will be
duplicated. It's only a problem with DIM/BRIGHT or if you use the commands
to trigger macros.

Only the collisions on units 1 & 9 are phase-dependent.

I'm not clear what problem you are trying to solve. If you're using two
transceivers in lieu of a phase coupler, then two TM751s will be OK EXCEPT
for the unit 1 & 9 collisions. They have no collision avoidance so their
transmissions for units 2-8 & 10-16 will coincide - they will not cause
duplicates.

bcboy@thecraftstudio.com wrote:

>I just verified that the 501s were on opposite phases. I was getting
>ready to put them on the same phase to see if it made any difference
>when I found that this morning I'm not seeing duplicates. Heh. I love
>x10. I never know what it's going to do.
>
>In theory should putting them on the same phase solve the issue? I was
>thinking of getting a V572A and putting two antennas on it. It's more
>than I want to spend, but I can't afford much more debug time on the
>501s.
>
>I thought that perhaps some 220V device was on last night, causing the
>signal across the phases to be stronger. But I can't actually identify
>any such device.

[bcboy@thecraftstudio.com]

The problem is coverage. I have stucco exterior walls with wire mesh,
and my floorplan is nonconvex. So line-of-sight to a single receiver
goes through two exterior walls from some locations. It doesn't pass
RF. I can cover the whole house with two antennas.

Between the coverage problems, the lockups, and the inability to do a
toggle, I'm about ready to ditch the RR501s and CM11A, and look for
something better. I'm not sure what that would be, though. Seems like
every X10 device has some significant caveat or flaw. I gather the
BX24-AHT is no longer an option.

[Dave Houston]

bcboy@thecraftstudio.com wrote:

>The problem is coverage. I have stucco exterior walls with wire mesh,
>and my floorplan is nonconvex. So line-of-sight to a single receiver
>goes through two exterior walls from some locations. It doesn't pass
>RF. I can cover the whole house with two antennas.

Two antennas may not help much. You'll have a different kind of phase
problem unless the antenna lead-ins are designed to be in phase at the
input.

I live in a building that has plaster walls and ceilings and lots of wire
lath. In my case, a centrally located antenna with a wide-band preamp does
the job. However, there's no simple way to do this with an RR501 because of
X-10's design and it's really not worthwhile given that the RR501 and TM751
only handle a single housecode.

>Between the coverage problems, the lockups, and the inability to do a
>toggle, I'm about ready to ditch the RR501s and CM11A, and look for
>something better. I'm not sure what that would be, though. Seems like
>every X10 device has some significant caveat or flaw. I gather the
>BX24-AHT is no longer an option.

The firmware for the BX24-AHT is still available as are all of the plans,
schematics, etc. That's all that I ever supplied. A grandson sold bare
boards for it. It would allow you to do a toggle. I've got about 50 of the
original BX24-AHT boards but I really don't want the hassle of trying to
sell them. My health is just too much of a problem.

I'm still working on a brain transplant for the CM15A but progress is slow
for the same health related reasons. But that's also why I don't want to do
any more with the BX24-AHT - the CM15A is a much better platform and the
total cost should be a bit less.