|
Home > Archive > Home Automation > November 2006 > X10 programming from PC
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
X10 programming from PC
|
|
| Geordie 2006-09-12, 1:25 pm |
| Hi,
I'm trying to control an X10 system through a CM12U (similar to CM11) via
the serial port, using my own software.
I know the software is correctly talking to the serial port (because I tried
it with a modem), but I'm having difficulty communicating with the CM12.
What I'm sending is 0x04 (Header) then 0x5E (to address unit G2) but I can't
get a Checksum back from the CM12.
Any thoughts? One thing I noticed in the "Interface Communication Protocol"
document at the end of section 3.1 is "This format is typical of all
transmissions between the PC and the interface with the difference being in
the first transmission from the PC." - but I couldn't find anything about
__what__ is different about the first transmission.
TIA,
Geordie
| |
| Robert Bonomi 2006-09-12, 5:25 pm |
| In article <9eANg.27133$DB3.23003@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net>,
Geordie <bill-gibson_remove_@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm trying to control an X10 system through a CM12U (similar to CM11) via
>the serial port, using my own software.
>
>I know the software is correctly talking to the serial port (because I tried
>it with a modem), but I'm having difficulty communicating with the CM12.
>What I'm sending is 0x04 (Header) then 0x5E (to address unit G2) but I can't
>get a Checksum back from the CM12.
>
>Any thoughts? One thing I noticed in the "Interface Communication Protocol"
>document at the end of section 3.1 is "This format is typical of all
>transmissions between the PC and the interface with the difference being in
>the first transmission from the PC." - but I couldn't find anything about
>__what__ is different about the first transmission.
The first possibility that comes to mind is that the CM12 might be DTE,
not DCE, and your cabling is wrong.
>
Try adding a null-modem.
| |
| Charles Sullivan 2006-09-14, 3:25 am |
| On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:19:33 +0000, Geordie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to control an X10 system through a CM12U (similar to CM11) via
> the serial port, using my own software.
>
> I know the software is correctly talking to the serial port (because I tried
> it with a modem), but I'm having difficulty communicating with the CM12.
> What I'm sending is 0x04 (Header) then 0x5E (to address unit G2) but I can't
> get a Checksum back from the CM12.
>
> Any thoughts? One thing I noticed in the "Interface Communication Protocol"
> document at the end of section 3.1 is "This format is typical of all
> transmissions between the PC and the interface with the difference being in
> the first transmission from the PC." - but I couldn't find anything about
> __what__ is different about the first transmission.
>
> TIA,
> Geordie
Are you sending the two bytes in one transmission? Sending separately
usually doesn't work.
Try sending the single byte 0xEB and you should get the same byte echoed
back.
| |
| Geordie 2006-09-15, 1:25 pm |
|
"Charles Sullivan" <cwsulliv@triad.rr.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.14.04.14.23.615463@triad.rr.com...
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:19:33 +0000, Geordie wrote:
>
>
> Are you sending the two bytes in one transmission? Sending separately
> usually doesn't work.
>
> Try sending the single byte 0xEB and you should get the same byte echoed
> back.
>
>
Hi,
Thanks to all for your suggestions - as it happens, the immediate problem
lay elsewhere, but they're worth knowing about as I develop my code.
My starting point in all of this was that my X-10 system was getting
unreliable, and got worse when I upgraded the controlling PC to XP - I put
the problems down to the ActiveHome software, so decided to write my own.
After thinking about the posted suggestions, and trying a few other things
out, I tried out Test Communications on ActiveHome's Tools menu - no
response from the CM12. Replaced the CM12 and everything works again!
That still leaves me disillusioned with the ActiveHome software - given that
the CM11/12 sends a checksum in response to each commend, why on earth
doesn't ActiveHome verify this and let the user know if there's a problem???
I'll continue with my own software, but without so much pressure!
Thanks again for the pointers,
Geordie
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-19, 3:25 am |
| I'm new to home automation. I know about X-10. You can use a PC,
Windows or Linux to control x-10? What hardware do you use to do this?
What software? Do you leave the PC on 24-7?
Come Join:
http://groups.google.com/group/real...nal_and_control
realtime_signal_and_control@googlegroups.com
Geordie wrote:
> "Charles Sullivan" <cwsulliv@triad.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.09.14.04.14.23.615463@triad.rr.com...
> Hi,
>
> Thanks to all for your suggestions - as it happens, the immediate problem
> lay elsewhere, but they're worth knowing about as I develop my code.
>
> My starting point in all of this was that my X-10 system was getting
> unreliable, and got worse when I upgraded the controlling PC to XP - I put
> the problems down to the ActiveHome software, so decided to write my own.
> After thinking about the posted suggestions, and trying a few other things
> out, I tried out Test Communications on ActiveHome's Tools menu - no
> response from the CM12. Replaced the CM12 and everything works again!
>
> That still leaves me disillusioned with the ActiveHome software - given that
> the CM11/12 sends a checksum in response to each commend, why on earth
> doesn't ActiveHome verify this and let the user know if there's a problem???
> I'll continue with my own software, but without so much pressure!
>
> Thanks again for the pointers,
> Geordie
| |
| Staiger 2006-09-19, 8:25 pm |
| "Geordie"wrote:
> I tried out Test Communications on ActiveHome's Tools menu - no
> response from the CM12. Replaced the CM12 and everything works again!
In my experience the CM11/12 is the most unreliable piece of junk you can
buy. I've been using ActiveHome recently, like Geordie, and have found that
after a few downloads of "timers and macros" the CM11 just stops responding.
There are clearly problems with the software in the CM11/12, and it's
appalling that the manufacturers haven't fixed it after all these years.
However, if you unplug it, remove the batteries and wait, refit the
batteries, plug it in and start again it works again. Obviously a software
lockup.
My suggestion to Geordie is to do that, rather than replacing the unit, when
it goes wrong next time (which it surely will).
Incidentally, I'm pretty unhappy with ActiveHome. It's a 16-bit application
which hasn't been updated in years, and has a very clunky look and feel to
it. I tried Harmony, but it looks like it's been put together by someone
who's just learned Visual Basic so, like Geordie, I also will be writing my
own control program.
Geordie, what programming language/environment are you using? I was gonna
use Delphi, with which I'm reasonably familiar.
Thack
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-19, 8:25 pm |
| Who makes these CM11 and CM12U devices?
Using a PC to control x-10? Wouldn't you rather have some diskless,
fanless, microsoftless box, made to be on 24/7, that won't tie down
your PC? Wouldn't that be nicer?
Come Join:
http://groups.google.com/group/real...nal_and_control
realtime_signal_and_control@googlegroups.com
Staiger wrote:
> "Geordie"wrote:
>
>
> In my experience the CM11/12 is the most unreliable piece of junk you can
> buy. I've been using ActiveHome recently, like Geordie, and have found that
> after a few downloads of "timers and macros" the CM11 just stops responding.
> There are clearly problems with the software in the CM11/12, and it's
> appalling that the manufacturers haven't fixed it after all these years.
>
> However, if you unplug it, remove the batteries and wait, refit the
> batteries, plug it in and start again it works again. Obviously a software
> lockup.
>
> My suggestion to Geordie is to do that, rather than replacing the unit, when
> it goes wrong next time (which it surely will).
>
> Incidentally, I'm pretty unhappy with ActiveHome. It's a 16-bit application
> which hasn't been updated in years, and has a very clunky look and feel to
> it. I tried Harmony, but it looks like it's been put together by someone
> who's just learned Visual Basic so, like Geordie, I also will be writing my
> own control program.
>
> Geordie, what programming language/environment are you using? I was gonna
> use Delphi, with which I'm reasonably familiar.
>
> Thack
| |
| AZ Woody 2006-09-19, 9:25 pm |
| My cm15a has been solid as a rock for over a year. But here's the real
background.
I do not use activehome, and have nothing loaded to the cm15a.
Everything is driven from a Linux app. The App sees all that's
happening, and drives events to the cm15a. As a "dumb" USB device, it's
been pretty good.
The Linux box happens to also be my web server, so it's on 24/7 - and
has disks and fans.. Last boot was over a month ago, and that was
because I was painting the office, and had to unplug it! Before that,
IIRC, it had been up for almost 100 days, and that boot was due to an
update to the kernel..
frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:
> Who makes these CM11 and CM12U devices?
>
> Using a PC to control x-10? Wouldn't you rather have some diskless,
> fanless, microsoftless box, made to be on 24/7, that won't tie down
> your PC? Wouldn't that be nicer?
>
> Come Join:
> http://groups.google.com/group/real...nal_and_control
>
> realtime_signal_and_control@googlegroups.com
>
> Staiger wrote:
>
| |
| Staiger 2006-09-20, 9:25 am |
| > Using a PC to control x-10? Wouldn't you rather have some diskless,
> fanless, microsoftless box, made to be on 24/7, that won't tie down
> your PC? Wouldn't that be nicer?
Too right! But I'm not talking about my PC being up and running all the
time. At the moment I just fire up ActiveHome when I want to change the
timings on my various lights and appliances. Then I download the data to
the CM11 and let it get on with it.
HOWEVER - because the damn CM11 seems to be inherently unreliable in that
mode (i.e. running downloaded timings and macros) the obvious solution is to
operate it in "dumb" mode as a signalling converter, and let another
computer do the controlling.
I wouldn't use a PC, though, unless it was up and running all the time for
some other purpose, like AZ Woody's.
I have thought about implementing my own PIC-based solution to take over the
"smarts" of the CM11, just using the CM11 as a signalling converter.
Has anyone else done this already? Or can I buy something like it?
Thack
| |
| Ian Shef 2006-09-20, 5:25 pm |
| "Staiger" <Staiger@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:04adnaQbW6TurIzYnZ2dnUVZ8tadnZ2d@bt.com:
<snip>
>
> I have thought about implementing my own PIC-based solution to take over
> the "smarts" of the CM11, just using the CM11 as a signalling converter.
>
> Has anyone else done this already? Or can I buy something like it?
<snip>
See JDS Technologies
http://www.jdstechnologies.com/
I am not affiliated with this company, just a satisfied customer. I used a
TimeCommander (predecessor to their current products) for many years. It
gets connected to a PC for programming, then can be disconnected from the PC.
Their Stargate products work similarly but have more features.
The TimeCommander performs operations based on time and based on X-10 traffic
that it sees on the power line. It knows the date and the time (and
sunset/sunrise), has timers, and has logic like If-then-else. It has test
features, and can log what it does (readable from a PC). It also has battery
backup for its clock/calendar, and can be programmed to take appropriate
actions when power is restored after a poer failure.
I used my TimeCommander for many years to control my swimming pool and some
minor functions in my house. I gave it up only because I have quit X-10.
The TimeCommander worked fine. The programming software had some minor flaws
but was quite nice. The programming software worked on Windows 95 as well as
on Windows ME. I don't know whether it would work on Windows NT / 2000 / XP.
--
Ian Shef 805/F6 * These are my personal opinions
Raytheon Company * and not those of my employer.
PO Box 11337 *
Tucson, AZ 85734-1337 *
| |
| Geordie 2006-09-21, 8:26 pm |
|
"Staiger" <Staiger@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:g-adnYo8t_qaH43YRVny2g@bt.com...
>
> In my experience the CM11/12 is the most unreliable piece of junk you can
> buy. I've been using ActiveHome recently, like Geordie, and have found
> that after a few downloads of "timers and macros" the CM11 just stops
> responding. There are clearly problems with the software in the CM11/12,
> and it's appalling that the manufacturers haven't fixed it after all these
> years.
>
> However, if you unplug it, remove the batteries and wait, refit the
> batteries, plug it in and start again it works again. Obviously a
> software lockup.
>
> My suggestion to Geordie is to do that, rather than replacing the unit,
> when it goes wrong next time (which it surely will).
>
> Incidentally, I'm pretty unhappy with ActiveHome. It's a 16-bit
> application which hasn't been updated in years, and has a very clunky look
> and feel to it. I tried Harmony, but it looks like it's been put together
> by someone who's just learned Visual Basic so, like Geordie, I also will
> be writing my own control program.
>
> Geordie, what programming language/environment are you using? I was gonna
> use Delphi, with which I'm reasonably familiar.
>
> Thack
One thing that convinced me my CM12 was beyond hope, was that it didn't get
warm in the right places (around the transformer). I had effectively
already done a cold-start when I tried replacing the batteries without
effect.
After I replaced the unit, I opened it up. The build quality reminded me
1960's transistor radios - the first ones, just after they stopped using
miniature valves. Paper-based PCB, globs of solder and globs of rubber
cement (do I really want something like this connected to the househuld
wiring?). This was a serial-port version - I don't know whether the
replacement USB versions are any better.
My software is on the back burner now that the system is running again (and,
when the h/w is so flaky, do I really want to spend time writing s/w for
it?). I'm using C++Builder - I like Borland's language products but prefer
C(++) to Pascal.
Cheers,
Geordie
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-21, 9:25 pm |
| Who makes these CM11 and CM12 units? Do other people make such?
Have you read Finux Smart Homes for Dummies, by Neil Cherry?
Come Join:
http://groups.google.com/group/real...nal_and_control
realtime_signal_and_control@googlegroups.com
Geordie wrote:
> "Staiger" <Staiger@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> news:g-adnYo8t_qaH43YRVny2g@bt.com...
> One thing that convinced me my CM12 was beyond hope, was that it didn't get
> warm in the right places (around the transformer). I had effectively
> already done a cold-start when I tried replacing the batteries without
> effect.
>
> After I replaced the unit, I opened it up. The build quality reminded me
> 1960's transistor radios - the first ones, just after they stopped using
> miniature valves. Paper-based PCB, globs of solder and globs of rubber
> cement (do I really want something like this connected to the househuld
> wiring?). This was a serial-port version - I don't know whether the
> replacement USB versions are any better.
>
> My software is on the back burner now that the system is running again (and,
> when the h/w is so flaky, do I really want to spend time writing s/w for
> it?). I'm using C++Builder - I like Borland's language products but prefer
> C(++) to Pascal.
>
> Cheers,
> Geordie
| |
| AZ Woody 2006-09-22, 3:25 am |
| It's "Linux" and not "Finux", and Neil posts here quite often.
The CM11/12 is made by X10, but there are other things like it available
from other vendors....
Why join a google group, when the author is here on usenet?
frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:
> Who makes these CM11 and CM12 units? Do other people make such?
>
> Have you read Finux Smart Homes for Dummies, by Neil Cherry?
>
> Come Join:
> http://groups.google.com/group/real...nal_and_control
>
> realtime_signal_and_control@googlegroups.com
>
>
> Geordie wrote:
>
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-22, 9:25 am |
| Niel? Do you mean Neil Cherry? I have his book right here. Looks
like there is also a CM17.
Anyone using HomePlug for home automation? They say it can also speak
to X-10.
I hadn't realized there was a culture chasm between usenets and google
groups.
I started a google group because I'm familiar with them, and its
available and free.
You can communicate with it by just email. But you have some extra
abilities if you register with google and do it from there.
I'll try and add you now. You can unsubscribe yourself real easy if
you don't like it.
If you register with google, you can stay in, but alter your email
preferences.
AZ Woody wrote:[color=darkred]
> It's "Linux" and not "Finux", and Neil posts here quite often.
>
> The CM11/12 is made by X10, but there are other things like it available
> from other vendors....
>
> Why join a google group, when the author is here on usenet?
>
>
> frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-22, 9:25 am |
| AZ Woody, looks like I can't add you because I can't get your complete
email address.
Why don't you just click on my link and join up. Register with google
if you are not already.
frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:[color=darkred]
> Niel? Do you mean Neil Cherry? I have his book right here. Looks
> like there is also a CM17.
>
> Anyone using HomePlug for home automation? They say it can also speak
> to X-10.
>
> I hadn't realized there was a culture chasm between usenets and google
> groups.
>
> I started a google group because I'm familiar with them, and its
> available and free.
>
> You can communicate with it by just email. But you have some extra
> abilities if you register with google and do it from there.
>
> I'll try and add you now. You can unsubscribe yourself real easy if
> you don't like it.
>
> If you register with google, you can stay in, but alter your email
> preferences.
>
> AZ Woody wrote:
| |
| Neil Cherry 2006-09-22, 1:25 pm |
| On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:48:04 -0700, AZ Woody wrote:
> It's "Linux" and not "Finux", and Neil posts here quite often.
Had me confused! :-) I'll be posting more often since I've finished
the book.
[color=darkred]
> The CM11/12 is made by X10, but there are other things like it available
> from other vendors....
>
> Why join a google group, when the author is here on usenet?
>
Frank, I know you are trying to drive up your membership but I don't
think HA really fits well with a realtime control group. That's too
specific and we're mostly using whatever the vendors are selling.
Geordie:
I'm not sure what to replace the CM11/CM12 with. I'm moving forward
with the Insteon technology because it is compatible with X10 (the
controller can control both). Recently some folks in the Linux
community got a driver for ZWave (RF) and another is working on UPB. I
don't think ZWave by itself will be a winner but mixed with Insteon or
UPB the combination could prove worthwhile
BTW, I probably have most of the X10 controllers here somewhere. I
just haven't had time to work with every one of them.
--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com
http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ Backup site
| |
| Dave Houston 2006-09-22, 5:25 pm |
| Neil Cherry <njc@cookie.uucp> wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:48:04 -0700, AZ Woody wrote:
>
>Had me confused! :-) I'll be posting more often since I've finished
>the book.
"Finux" had me flummuxed. ;)
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-23, 3:25 am |
| What is Zwave?
And I still invite you all to my group. Since it is new, it is quite
flexible.
| |
| AZ Woody 2006-09-23, 3:25 am |
| frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:
> What is Zwave?
>
> And I still invite you all to my group. Since it is new, it is quite
> flexible.
>
Why a new group to discuss something that's already being discussed else
ware? Seems that that's only a way to make the world more complicated
to find out info!
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-23, 1:25 pm |
| These groups all have different scope and character. Mine is defined
more broadly than this one is. But since it is new, there is not much
activity. So if you get in, you can really influence it. Why don't
you join and see.
What is ZWave? I really have no idea.
AZ Woody wrote:
> frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Why a new group to discuss something that's already being discussed else
> ware? Seems that that's only a way to make the world more complicated
> to find out info!
| |
| frank.agee@gmail.com 2006-09-23, 1:25 pm |
| These groups all have different scope and character. Mine is defined
more broadly than this one is. But since it is new, there is not much
activity. So if you get in, you can really influence it. Why don't
you join and see.
What is ZWave? I really have no idea.
AZ Woody wrote:
> frank.agee@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Why a new group to discuss something that's already being discussed else
> ware? Seems that that's only a way to make the world more complicated
> to find out info!
| |
| rcochran@lanset.com 2006-09-26, 5:25 pm |
| Staiger wrote:
> I have thought about implementing my own PIC-based solution to take over the
> "smarts" of the CM11, just using the CM11 as a signalling converter.
>
> Has anyone else done this already? Or can I buy something like it?
I did it. Mine's had an uptime of about two years now, without a
reboot or lockup. Very low power consumption, low parts count,
low cost, high reliability.
http://webs.lanset.com/rcochran/cm11a.html
| |
|
|
|
| On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:27:21 GMT, Ian Shef <invalid@avoiding.spam>
wrote:
snipped
>
>See JDS Technologies
>http://www.jdstechnologies.com/
>
>I am not affiliated with this company, just a satisfied customer.
Snipped here too
Just a word of warning on the JDS site. It sets a snoop little bug
browser window to watch your activites when you visit their site.
Not a good thing for a legitimate site to be doing.
T-Ulk
| |
|
|
|
|
|