UPB & Lightolier Compose Firewalls

[dschoppe]

Is anyone using UPB in the presence of one or more Lightolier Compose firewalls?

I'd like to supplement my Compose/x10 installation with either UPB or Zwave, just to control a few devices (circulation pump, espresso maker, etc.) located on branch circuits wired "outside" the firewall.

My Compose/x10 is solid, so after a recent experience with TED (posted here) I'm a little reluctant to introduce another power line carrier.

On the other hand, Zwave may also face problems in my home, since the mesh density will be quite low (unless I add some plug-in modules just for the purposes of routing).

Thanks,
Don

[Uncle Michael]

Don,
I'm about to give this scheme a test. I also have been very pleased with my Compose system, but I have a few circuits with enough noise that if they are inside the firewall Compose just shuts down all X10 traffic with them.

I've decided to try UPB as a way to introduce automation to one of those circuits (and a few others). I also plan to see what happens when I place a UPB switch inside the firewall. I just received my UPB switches and PIM and plan to begin installing them next week. I'll post my experience here.

[dschoppe]

Michael,

My thought was to send UPB on circuits "outside" the firewall and only Compose/X10 on those "inside" (i.e., wired through) the firewall. To bridge UPB across phases, I'd probably give a passive UPB coupler a try before intruducing another active coupler, repeater, amp, etc.

If you're going to run UPB inside, won't you still need a UPB coupler? I suspect that the Compose firewall won't "repeat" UPB it receives on one circuit to all others as it does for X10.

Also, on your "noisy" circuits, have you tried adding additional filters? All of my florescent lights have Lightolier filters on them for good measure. While I do see noise on some circuits (as much as 1.5v per ACT tester) this doesn't seem to impact reliability at all. Having TED's transmitter "hit" the firewall from the outside every second was a different story though.

Please keep us updated on your findings.

Thanks,
Don

[Uncle Michael]

Michael,
If you're going to run UPB inside, won't you still need a UPB coupler? I suspect that the Compose firewall won't "repeat" UPB it receives on one circuit to all others as it does for X10.

That is my assumption as well. My plan is to do some experimenting to see what happens.

Also, on your "noisy" circuits, have you tried adding additional filters?

My design goal was to isolate noisy devices to a few circuits outside the firewall. I could put each device on a filter, but I want to see how UPB deals with them first. The same with couplers, etc. UPB gets a lot of positive press. I'm hoping it will be enough better than X10 that it can outperform Compose without going to a great deal of extra trouble. If I have to use filters, couplers, repeaters then I'll just use X10 devices and save myself the complexity of implementing UPB too.

[Event5]

Try UPB without the firewall and without a coupler. See what happens. Do you have UPStart yet? Look for a signal strength over 9 on the scale of 1 - 100. With upstart you can also see what noise is there. The UPB world is "almost" nothing like x10.

Enjoy
Dave

[dschoppe]

Mike,

In your Compose installation, do you happen to have any locations with a CP master keypad (set in verify mode) controlling several compose dimmers on the same address?

For me, with TED's 1 sec transmit period on the power line, interference with compose was most noticeable on the above setup. By selecting different scenes on the CP keypad, I could easily see that not all dimmers would respond, and I could see the packets corruptions with my ACT tester (as well as reported by my Compose RS232 plugin).

If there is a way to put UPB in test mode and force it to transmit every second, you might try to above test to look for interference.

Don

[Event5]

Here is a sample page of a communication test feature in UPStart. Please note the settings available at the bottom. By the way the network on this screen capture is a testing network and many of the devices listed do not exist in the network anymore. That is why there are a lot of missing devices showing.

[dschoppe]

Event5,

Thanks, the UPStart testing features should come in handy.

Don

[Uncle Michael]

Update1

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions.

Good news: I've successfully installed devices and found them with UPStart. Noise that UPB cares about is almost non-detectable, even on the circuit with disabling levels of noise for X10. It does not seem to matter if the devices are inside or outside the Compose firewall. In both cases the signal strength is excellent (>50).

Bad news: It does matter which split the device is on. If it's not on the same side as the PIM, then signal strength is extremely low (2-3). GenII switches work- most of the time, but plug-in module does not. (UPStart cannot find it.) Also, one of the switches I wanted to automate has no neutral and no evident way to get one to it without doing significant damage to the wall. If there were only a way to use RF to deliver a neutral

I have not yet installed the UPB phase coupler (SA ZPCI-W), but I'm definitely curious to see if it has any effect on Compose performance. (I'm waiting for an electrician friend to wire it in for me. I don't work inside the electrical panel.)

I also have not run an extensive test to see if UPB signals affect Compose, but limited testing did not reveal anything obvious.

Don, I do not have any Compose masters, only room keypads, but they all control several dimmers on the same address. Some are set for verification, but only one per room. I've looked at the UPStart test suggested by Dave, and plan to give it a try to see if I pick up any interference that way.

[dschoppe]

It does not seem to matter if the devices are inside or outside the Compose firewall. In both cases the signal strength is excellent (>50)..

Mike, do I understand this to mean that UPB penetrates right through the firewall from devices on the inside to outside and the reverse (i.e., as long as the circuits are on the same phase/leg)?

Don, I do not have any Compose masters, only room keypads, but they all control several dimmers on the same address. Some are set for verification, but only one per room. I've looked at the UPStart test suggested by Dave, and plan to give it a try to see if I pick up any interference that way.

Thanks, I actually meant the the room keypad anyway (i.e., where one or more keypads and several dimmers are set to the same address, with one of the keypads set to verify mode). This is the arrangement that seemed to suffer most while TED was transmitting. These keypads and dimmers were also wired to the first circuit in the firewall which also just happens to power the firewall itself. Hmmm, I wonder if the firewall is more sensitive to outside noise on circuit #1?

[Uncle Michael]

Mike, do I understand this to mean that UPB penetrates right through the firewall from devices on the inside to outside and the reverse (i.e., as long as the circuits are on the same phase/leg)?

Don,
My UPB PIM is outside the firewall, so I can say that the UPB signal appears to be unblocked by the firewall when it comes from outside it. I have not tried the PIM inside the firewall (and do not expect to).

While on the subject, I've also found that my X10 PIM (PSC05) that is inside the firewall generates X10 signals that are readily detected outside the firewall. (X10 signals generated outside the firewall seem to be pretty well blocked inside it, however, as I would expect.)

I can't speak to your second question yet, but I will pay particular attention to the circuits that provide power to my firewall boxes to see if they are more prone to UPB interference than the others. That experiment will have to wait until I get the phase coupler installed.

[Uncle Michael]

Update 2 - unexpected results

I now have the SA phase coupler installed. Results were not what I expected.

w/o coupler (breakers off): strong UPB signal on same leg as PIM, very weak signal (GenII) or test failed on other leg.

with coupler (breakers on): strong signal on same leg as PIM, test failed on other leg - even for GenII!

Limited testing did not reveal any obvious problem for Compose caused by the added phase coupler, but I would not be surprised if subtle and/or intermittent problems crop up.

Overall conclusion: UPB and Compose almost play together, but unless the coupler I have is defective (all three green LEDs are lit), then something appears to interfere with it, and the Compose firewall is the most likely suspect. Any suggestions for other possible causes or troubleshooting tips would be appreciated.

[Event5]

Michael,

The SA coupler you have is an inverting phase coupler. In some installations it might be better to use a non-inverting coupler from PCS or HAI. Who is your supplier? If it is Automated Outlet, give them a call.

What gen 2 devices are you using?

You might also want to give SA tech support a call and discribe your situation. They have a lot of experience working through "situations"

Customer Support 8am - 5pm PST, Monday - Friday

• 800-630-9234 x138
• upbhelp@simply-automated.com

Dave

[Uncle Michael]

Dave,
All my UPB stuff is from Worthington. Everything but the coupler is PCS. The GenII switches are model WS1D.

I will try calling SA. Can't hurt.

BTW, my installation has a main panel and a sub. The PIM is on the sub panel, but the coupler is on the main panel. (That's where I had spare breakers.) The UPB signal strength is high on one leg in both panels and low on the other leg in both, regardless of whether the coupler is present or not. Because the behavior of the two legs is the same on both panels, I am guessing that is not the problem, but thought I'd mention it in case I'm missing something.

[dschoppe]

Hi Mike,

Did you manage to resolve the UPB signal strength issue you were seeing on one leg of your panel(s)?

Thanks,
Don