Insteon compatibility

[Ward Abbott]

Is the Insteon system compatible with X-10 modules? Is this more
reliable than the existing technology?

[Neil Cherry]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:07:49 GMT, Ward Abbott wrote:
> Is the Insteon system compatible with X-10 modules? Is this more
> reliable than the existing technology?
>


--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Neil Cherry]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:07:49 GMT, Ward Abbott wrote:
> Is the Insteon system compatible with X-10 modules? Is this more
> reliable than the existing technology?

Insteon has the potential to be more reliable. Electrically it can
fall prey to the same maladies that haunt X10 (and use the same
methods to avoid those problems). When using the Insteon devices as
X10 devices nothing is gained other than it works with X10. But when
used with Insteon commands and having the devices enrolled with the
controller (that's very important!) you get commands ACK'd (that's
good), NAK'd (somethings wrong, resend command), ignored something's
really wrong and waiting for the commands reply will time out (device
is dead, unplugged or not there) and finally a device which isn't
enrolled will give you a sorry I'm not enrolled with you so I'm not
listening to you type of message. Of course if your software isn't
smart enough to listen for these things then you gain nothing. As is
the case of my iplcd at this time, but then again that's not exacly
the purpose of the iplcd. The Enrollment app is something that could
be listening and handle the enrollment while other apps listen and
react for other things. Does this help?


--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Dennis Brothers]

"Ward Abbott" <presby@terian.com> wrote in message
news:hla9i1h133caq9k1m5of9t24i6r9ehkev7@4ax.com...
> Is the Insteon system compatible with X-10 modules? Is this more
> reliable than the existing technology?
>
All current Insteon modules (where it makes sense) can be configured to
respond to X10 commands in addition to Insteon, making it easy to add them
to X10-based systems.

Insteon protocol itself is way more reliable than X10 for two reasons (IMO):
all commands are ACKed (or NAKed); and every Insteon device functions as a
repeater, so signal level issues are pretty much eliminated.

HTH -
- Dennis Brothers

[Dave Houston]

"Dennis Brothers" <mysurname@bros.invalid> wrote:

>and every Insteon device functions as a
>repeater, so signal level issues are pretty much eliminated.

IMO, that's overstating things a bit. The biggest problem for X-10 is
devices that attenuate the signal. Devices that eat 120kHz are likely to
also eat 131.65kHz. While Insteon addresses the issue of signal level it
doesn't completely solve it.

[Neil Cherry]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:31:30 GMT, Dave Houston wrote:
> "Dennis Brothers" <mysurname@bros.invalid> wrote:
>
>>and every Insteon device functions as a
>>repeater, so signal level issues are pretty much eliminated.
>
> IMO, that's overstating things a bit. The biggest problem for X-10 is
> devices that attenuate the signal. Devices that eat 120kHz are likely to
> also eat 131.65kHz. While Insteon addresses the issue of signal level it
> doesn't completely solve it.

I agree with Dave on this. Having said that the Insteon controller is
working well despite being on a power strip with 2 LampLinc V2, 2
CM11As, an AM14, 2 TW523's and 2 appliance modules (not to mention a
number of small switching pwoer supplies). All the devices work so
it's not just the Insteon though I think the combination is causing me
signal weakening as I can no longer talk to the other phase (I have a
signal bridge) and my thermostat or garage light (both on phase B).

For the Insteon devices I have a pair of SignalLincs. I wish they'd
bridge X10 too, I guess I'll just have to replace the X10 modules. :-)

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Dave Houston]

nobody@whocares.com (Dave Houston) wrote:

>"Dennis Brothers" <mysurname@bros.invalid> wrote:
>
>>and every Insteon device functions as a
>>repeater, so signal level issues are pretty much eliminated.
>
>IMO, that's overstating things a bit. The biggest problem for X-10 is
>devices that attenuate the signal. Devices that eat 120kHz are likely to
>also eat 131.65kHz. While Insteon addresses the issue of signal level it
>doesn't completely solve it.

To clarify this...

There are two types of devices that attenuate both X-10 and Insteon signals.


One type consists of X-10 and Insteon transmitters which nibble at the
signal strength by loading the powerline. With X-10, the more transmitters
the lower is signal strength. Insteon transmitters have the same effect and
since all Insteon devices are two-way, all include transmitters. Insteon
solves this by having all Insteon devices repeat the signal so, if there are
no other signal eating devices, Insteon signal level tends to be a constant
level thoughout the "network". The more Insteon devices, the better it is
for Insteon signal level. However, Insteon transmitters also nibble at X-10
signals which are not repeated so the more Insteon devices, the lower are
X-10 signal levels.

The other type of signal attenuation usually comes from other devices
plugged into the powerline that have line filter capacitors between line and
neutral. These usually take large bytes out of both X-10 and Insteon signals
and repeating the signals may not overcome the effect. Filters used for X-10
will also address this problem for Insteon.

[Neil Cherry]

A bit more info on actual Insteon use:

I have an old ELK ESM1 and it can measure the Insteon signal's
strenght (or least I think it can). It doesn't show valid packets
because the ESM1 is made for X10 but I'm seeing pulse of about 1V.
With the SignalLincs I also see a 1V signal in my garage which is the
weakest portion of my house (from an X10 prospective). Here's the
setup:

[Insteon PLC] [SignalLinc]
Comp. Rm | | Phase A [Breakers]
+--------+-------------+---------------\ +-----+
[SignalLinc] \--| # # |
Study | Phase B | # # |
+----------------------+-------------------| # # |
[ESM 1] | # # |
Garage | Phase B /--| # # |
+--------+-------------+---------------/ +-----+

First I connected the ESM1 to the same circuit as the PLC. Measures
about 1V (+/- 1 bar at times, visual average is 1v). I then put the
ESM1 on the garage circuit and I see the same signal strength ~1V.

While this is not a scientific test it does bode well for Insteon in
my home. I do have some signal suckers such as TV's and stereo's that
currently kill my X10. In fact my computer room has gotten so bad that
my X10 thermostat no longer receives an X10 signal but I don't know if
it's damaged or it due to signal strength. The thermostat is on it's
own circuit (AC baseboard heating). The reason for signal strength
issuse is that I have 8 PLCs and several PC's all on the same circuit
(no where near overloading the 15 amp circuit).

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Dave Houston]

Neil,

I saw much higher Insteon signal levels with my ESM1 which probably
indicates that you have more signal suckers than do I. Aside from PLC
transmitters I only have one major signal sucker and it's behind a filter.

The fact that you get workable Insteon signal levels speaks well for their
repeater philosophy.

It would be interesting to know the ESM1 X-10 signal strength in your
computer room and garage.

FWIW, my ESM1 shows a peak response at about 131kHz which is closer to the
Insteon carrier than to the X-10 carrier.

Neil Cherry <njc@wolfgang.uucp> wrote:

>A bit more info on actual Insteon use:
>
>I have an old ELK ESM1 and it can measure the Insteon signal's
>strenght (or least I think it can). It doesn't show valid packets
>because the ESM1 is made for X10 but I'm seeing pulse of about 1V.
>With the SignalLincs I also see a 1V signal in my garage which is the
>weakest portion of my house (from an X10 prospective). Here's the
>setup:
>
> [Insteon PLC] [SignalLinc]
>Comp. Rm | | Phase A [Breakers]
>+--------+-------------+---------------\ +-----+
> [SignalLinc] \--| # # |
>Study | Phase B | # # |
>+----------------------+-------------------| # # |
> [ESM 1] | # # |
>Garage | Phase B /--| # # |
>+--------+-------------+---------------/ +-----+
>
>First I connected the ESM1 to the same circuit as the PLC. Measures
>about 1V (+/- 1 bar at times, visual average is 1v). I then put the
>ESM1 on the garage circuit and I see the same signal strength ~1V.
>
>While this is not a scientific test it does bode well for Insteon in
>my home. I do have some signal suckers such as TV's and stereo's that
>currently kill my X10. In fact my computer room has gotten so bad that
>my X10 thermostat no longer receives an X10 signal but I don't know if
>it's damaged or it due to signal strength. The thermostat is on it's
>own circuit (AC baseboard heating). The reason for signal strength
>issuse is that I have 8 PLCs and several PC's all on the same circuit
>(no where near overloading the 15 amp circuit).

[Neil Cherry]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:50:44 GMT, Dave Houston wrote:

> It would be interesting to know the ESM1 X-10 signal strength in your
> computer room and garage.
>
> FWIW, my ESM1 shows a peak response at about 131kHz which is closer to the
> Insteon carrier than to the X-10 carrier.

I'll send you the data later, I'm working on it.

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Neil Cherry]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:50:44 GMT, Dave Houston wrote:
> Neil,
>
> I saw much higher Insteon signal levels with my ESM1 which probably
> indicates that you have more signal suckers than do I. Aside from PLC
> transmitters I only have one major signal sucker and it's behind a filter.
>
> The fact that you get workable Insteon signal levels speaks well for their
> repeater philosophy.

This is very true, my X10 phase bridge is not amplified. So

> It would be interesting to know the ESM1 X-10 signal strength in your
> computer room and garage.

ESM1

+-----------------------------------+
| O [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] O |
| ! ! ! ! |
| .1v 1v 2.5v 5v |
+-----------------------------------+

Command sent M1MON (sent one at a time not repeated as rapidly as
possible).

Insteon PLC (sending Insteon)

What I see in both the garage (GA) and the computer room (CR) is a
similar spike pattern on the ESM1. At first it seems to pulse between
1v & 1 bar less. Then towards the finish of the command it moves to 1v
to plus 1 bar (see artwork above).

Insteon PLC (sending X10)

CR = 1v (exact)
GA = .1v

CM11A

CR = 1 bar less than 2.5v
GA = 0 (not seen)

TW523 (Ocelot)

CR = 1 bar less than 2.5v
GA = 0 (not seen)

CM15A

CR = 1 bar less than 2.5v
GA = .1v

> FWIW, my ESM1 shows a peak response at about 131kHz which is closer to the
> Insteon carrier than to the X-10 carrier.

Cool! Wish I could get a new chip to support both X10 and Insteon.
It's probably doable but I'm a little tight on time. I have a feeling
that many of the fundamentals of X10 PLC will work and x10 problems
will fail in a similar way with Insteon.

Yeah, yeah, I know so why am I posting here, it's a bit of a
distraction. :-)

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Dave Houston]

Neil,

Thanks for the measurements. Now I'll try to let you concentrate on your
book.

You obviously have some serious signal suckers. That the Insteon nodules
work where X-10 madules do not is evidence that Insteon certainly addresses
signal level issues but your rather low Insteon signal level is also
evidence that signal suckers will continue to be a problem.

I didn't record any ESM1 readings for Insteon signals because I had noticed
that it was a bit more sensitive to Insteon than to X-10 signals and I did
not know by how much. I do have some oscilloscope screenshots of the Insteon
signals and all seem to be a bit higher than 3Vpp even with some attenuators
between the source (tabletop controller) and the ESM1. When I was able to
catch the signal sent by the SignaLinc that shared a Y connection with the
ESM1, the signal was still higher. (I use those short Y extensions made for
plugging wallwarts into powerstrips.)

The manuals give a minimum PLC transmit level for all of the modules (3.2Vpp
into 5 ohms) but do not state a maximum.

According to the specs in the manual, the Insteon modules (including
SignaLinc) only need a 1mV PLC signal. If that much makes it to the
SignaLinc on Phase A, it will repeat it as RF to Phase B which repeats it as
PLC. Unless the signal suckers reduce the PLC level below 1mV, all the
Insteon modules should work.

It's looking more and more like Insteon is the real thing - reliable
powerline communications at a reasonable price but I would feel better if we
weren't still seeing reports of SwitchLincs & LampLincs losing their address
when there are power glitches.

Neil Cherry <njc@wolfgang.uucp> wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:50:44 GMT, Dave Houston wrote:
>> Neil,
>>
>> I saw much higher Insteon signal levels with my ESM1 which probably
>> indicates that you have more signal suckers than do I. Aside from PLC
>> transmitters I only have one major signal sucker and it's behind a filter.
>>
>> The fact that you get workable Insteon signal levels speaks well for their
>> repeater philosophy.
>
>This is very true, my X10 phase bridge is not amplified. So
>
>> It would be interesting to know the ESM1 X-10 signal strength in your
>> computer room and garage.
>
> ESM1
>
>+-----------------------------------+
>| O [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] O |
>| ! ! ! ! |
>| .1v 1v 2.5v 5v |
>+-----------------------------------+
>
>Command sent M1MON (sent one at a time not repeated as rapidly as
>possible).
>
>Insteon PLC (sending Insteon)
>
>What I see in both the garage (GA) and the computer room (CR) is a
>similar spike pattern on the ESM1. At first it seems to pulse between
>1v & 1 bar less. Then towards the finish of the command it moves to 1v
>to plus 1 bar (see artwork above).
>
>Insteon PLC (sending X10)
>
>CR = 1v (exact)
>GA = .1v
>
>CM11A
>
>CR = 1 bar less than 2.5v
>GA = 0 (not seen)
>
>TW523 (Ocelot)
>
>CR = 1 bar less than 2.5v
>GA = 0 (not seen)
>
>CM15A
>
>CR = 1 bar less than 2.5v
>GA = .1v
>
>> FWIW, my ESM1 shows a peak response at about 131kHz which is closer to the
>> Insteon carrier than to the X-10 carrier.
>
>Cool! Wish I could get a new chip to support both X10 and Insteon.
>It's probably doable but I'm a little tight on time. I have a feeling
>that many of the fundamentals of X10 PLC will work and x10 problems
>will fail in a similar way with Insteon.
>
>Yeah, yeah, I know so why am I posting here, it's a bit of a
>distraction. :-)

[Neil Cherry]

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 12:55:56 GMT, Dave Houston wrote:
> Neil,

> You obviously have some serious signal suckers.

Well all the devices mentioned are in one room. At least not all my
computers are plugged in. :-)

> You obviously have some serious signal suckers. That the Insteon nodules
> work where X-10 madules do not is evidence that Insteon certainly addresses
> signal level issues but your rather low Insteon signal level is also
> evidence that signal suckers will continue to be a problem.

My conclusion is along the same lines. I thinks it's the fact that my
SignalLincs are boosting the signal the the Insteon is working
better. A amplifier for X10 across the phases might help but I'm not
buying any more X10 (I've got enough appliance modules for holiday
lights).

Here's an odd one for you, the CM15A couldn't turn on or off the AM14
(A1) but all the other devices (all the controllers listed) could see
the signal (just < 2.5v) at the AM14. I could turn on & off a RS
appliance module (C1 and right next to it). To make things more
interesting the TW523 couldn't control A1 but the Insteon & CM11A were
able to control A1 (and C1). I have no explaination for this.

> It's looking more and more like Insteon is the real thing - reliable
> powerline communications at a reasonable price but I would feel better if we
> weren't still seeing reports of SwitchLincs & LampLincs losing their address
> when there are power glitches.

I agree seems to work pretty well (at least on paper and my flimsy
testing).

On the issue of the *Lincs and losing their address I'm guessing that
won't be so much of a problem as the addressing is hard coded. But I
am wondering when I send new paramters and/or code the the various
*Linc V2 modules (those are Insteon) will those be retained. So far
I'm not that far along but my home should be a good test bed we are
having lots of power problems lately (excess building and the
increased load on this section of the local grid). Eventually I will
have to bring my old UPS back on line. I just need to purchase 2 new
batteries.

One thing about the Insteon protocol, it's not as simple as X10 to
use. You need to enroll the modules with the controller(s) otherwise
the commands are ignored by the devices. This is both good and bad. I
wouldn't call it security as you can poke the devices address into the
controller. But the Insteon controller won't tell you the full address
of the device that's not enrolled.

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

[Dave Houston]

It's not so much the specific problem of address loss (I noted that Insteon
modules are hard coded in my review.) as it is the fact that they've allowed
a firmware problem to fester for several years. (There was a post by Martin
Custer yesterday that implies this is fixed in the latest SwitchLincs.) I
worry that there may be Insteon firmware problems that they will also allow
to fester.

Unlike some other manufacturers and their dealers, Insteon is not claiming
that the hard coded IDs offer security - they say they'll use rolling codes
for that.

Neil Cherry <njc@wolfgang.uucp> wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 12:55:56 GMT, Dave Houston wrote:
>> Neil,
>
>> You obviously have some serious signal suckers.
>
>Well all the devices mentioned are in one room. At least not all my
>computers are plugged in. :-)
>
>> You obviously have some serious signal suckers. That the Insteon nodules
>> work where X-10 madules do not is evidence that Insteon certainly addresses
>> signal level issues but your rather low Insteon signal level is also
>> evidence that signal suckers will continue to be a problem.
>
>My conclusion is along the same lines. I thinks it's the fact that my
>SignalLincs are boosting the signal the the Insteon is working
>better. A amplifier for X10 across the phases might help but I'm not
>buying any more X10 (I've got enough appliance modules for holiday
>lights).
>
>Here's an odd one for you, the CM15A couldn't turn on or off the AM14
>(A1) but all the other devices (all the controllers listed) could see
>the signal (just < 2.5v) at the AM14. I could turn on & off a RS
>appliance module (C1 and right next to it). To make things more
>interesting the TW523 couldn't control A1 but the Insteon & CM11A were
>able to control A1 (and C1). I have no explaination for this.
>
>> It's looking more and more like Insteon is the real thing - reliable
>> powerline communications at a reasonable price but I would feel better if we
>> weren't still seeing reports of SwitchLincs & LampLincs losing their address
>> when there are power glitches.
>
>I agree seems to work pretty well (at least on paper and my flimsy
>testing).
>
>On the issue of the *Lincs and losing their address I'm guessing that
>won't be so much of a problem as the addressing is hard coded. But I
>am wondering when I send new paramters and/or code the the various
>*Linc V2 modules (those are Insteon) will those be retained. So far
>I'm not that far along but my home should be a good test bed we are
>having lots of power problems lately (excess building and the
>increased load on this section of the local grid). Eventually I will
>have to bring my old UPS back on line. I just need to purchase 2 new
>batteries.
>
>One thing about the Insteon protocol, it's not as simple as X10 to
>use. You need to enroll the modules with the controller(s) otherwise
>the commands are ignored by the devices. This is both good and bad. I
>wouldn't call it security as you can poke the devices address into the
>controller. But the Insteon controller won't tell you the full address
>of the device that's not enrolled.