quote:

---

> Adding a screened porch to our home. Based on our lighting setup, I
> will have 7 individual circuits to control as follows:
>
> Circuit 1 - 2 Ceiling Fans (3 or variable speed)
> Circuit 2 - Light Kit on Ceiling Fan 1 (Dimming)
> Circuit 3 - Light Kit on Ceiling Fan 2 (Dimming)
> Circuit 4 - 4 Can lights (Dimming)
> Circuit 5 - 1 Light over Steps
> Circuit 6 - 1 Flood Light Fixture
> Circuit 7 - 1 Flood Light Fixture
>
> This is all new construction/wiring so I don't need socket adapters and
> such, it can all be inline switches. Wiring regular switches is not a
> problem, but there is no convient place to put 7 switches. And I would
> prefer it be in the house.
>
> Can someone recommend a way to control these seven circuits from a
> single control pad (Wired or wireless)? The ability to later control
> this remotely via a HTPC is a bonus, but not a requirement.
>
> Thanks for assistance!
>

quote:

---

> single control pad (Wired or wireless)? The ability to later control
> this remotely via a HTPC is a bonus, but not a requirement.

quote:

---

> just
> too unreliable. Sure, I wish is were otherwise but experience has shown
> me
> it's very unreliable.

quote:

---

>I would recommend you take a hard look at UPB. It has proven a 99.99%
>reliability record for 5 years now. Powerline used to mean X-10. UPB took
>the X-10 ideology and made it work. The two biggest problems with X-10 were
>signal strength and the frequency it was used at.

quote:

---

>Signal Strength. X-10 transmits 5 volts at the zero line crossing. It is
>extremely easy to get 5 volts of noise on a powerline circuit, and the zero
>line crossing is where noise is most prevalent. Once the voltage of the
>noise surpasses the voltage of the signal, you lost communications. The
>second problem is X-10 transmits at 121 KHz. At this frequency the signal
>attenuates, or loses its strength over a short distance. Combine these
>factors together (low signal strength over a short distance, and a little
>bit of noise) and X-10 does not work.

quote:

---

>Other complaints of X-10 had to use a coupler/repeater and it is slow. What
>do you think Radio Ra uses, basically every 30 feet you need a device to
>repeat the signal to get good coverage, and Radio Ra is as slow if not
>slower than X-10. Now I am not bashing Radio RA, it is a great reliable
>technology, but it 3 times the cost of professional X-10 or UPB. However if
>you want terracotta wall plates than you better call Lutron to get Radio RA.

quote:

---

>Now enter UPB.
>
>UPB transmits approximately 1/6th of a cycle before the sine wave at 40
>volts above the voltage of the sine wave. It has a peak voltage around 60
>volts transmitting in the 4-40 kHz spectrum. What this means, it works very
>well. You will not have noise the masks the UPB signal. If you do, you
>have a whole lot more to worry about than your lights, likely nothing in
>your home will operate properly. Due to its frequency, I have had dealer
>tell me they have seen UPB transmit over 5 miles of electrical cabling.

quote:

---

> year ago, and has been shipping for only 9 months or so.

quote:

---

> You are full of it. The loss of signal strength is independent of
> distance.
> There have been numerous studies that confirm this. It's the inductive and
> capacitive loading that attenuates the signal.

quote:

---

> Most X-10 transmitters actually transmit 10Vpp at 120kHz. Noise is lowest
> at
> zero crossing.

quote:

---

> Your description of a UPB "signal" sounds very much like noise pulses
> which
> are quite common from triacs, motors, ballasts, etc. As I understand it,
> UPB
> generates their pulse by rapidly discharging a capacitor. That sounds like
> a
> noise pulse.

quote:

---

> I suggest you learn a few fundamentals before trying to pass yourself off
> as
> an expert. Spouting nonsense like this on topics you obviously do not
> understand will get you an idiot label rather quickly.

quote:

---

> "Brett Griffin" <brett@architechtronics.spamkiller.com> wrote:
>
>
> 5 years? It was first announced about 2.5 years ago, first shown about a
> year ago, and has been shipping for only 9 months or so.
>
>
> You are full of it. The loss of signal strength is independent of
> distance.
> There have been numerous studies that confirm this. It's the inductive and
> capacitive loading that attenuates the signal.
>
> Most X-10 transmitters actually transmit 10Vpp at 120kHz. Noise is lowest
> at
> zero crossing.
>
>
> When did they reduce the speed of light? What about gravity? Have they
> changed that law, too?
>
>
> Your description of a UPB "signal" sounds very much like noise pulses
> which
> are quite common from triacs, motors, ballasts, etc. As I understand it,
> UPB
> generates their pulse by rapidly discharging a capacitor. That sounds like
> a
> noise pulse.
>
> I suggest you learn a few fundamentals before trying to pass yourself off
> as
> an expert. Spouting nonsense like this on topics you obviously do not
> understand will get you an idiot label rather quickly.

quote:

---

>
>Actally, PCS Lighting (who developed UPB technology) bagan alpha testing in
>1999, and beta testing in 2003. Actually they are still testing (because
>Marshall, the engineer that discovered the technology in his garage, wants
>to be sure there are no errors like X-10 has.) Products bagan shipping
>from PCS lighting in November of 2003, which is now 17 months according to
>my watch.
>
>
>What do you think long runs of copper create? At higher frequencies it
>attenuates the signal. I am a little light on this, I admit. However I
>know that long runs of cable translates into needing more signal strength.
>Several manufactures have explained this to me as well.
>
>
>I am not looking to argue symantics here. The point I am trying to bring up
>is that most manufacturers discuss a 5 volt signal and that is small enough
>for noise to mask the signal. UPB does not have this problem as it
>transmits 40 volts above/below the sine wave.
>
>
>Actually technically speaking it is Pulse Frequency modulation if you desire
>to get specific, I was trying to keep the discussion general enough so the
>entire audiance would understand. It may very well be as you describe a
>noise pulse. However it is the timing and positioning of the signal that
>encodes the data.
>
>
>I know my fundamentals, and I know this topic very well, I have taught over
>a thousand dealers about this topic and have been involved in close to 100
>installs. I was an HAI trainer until January 2005 when I left to be an
>independant consultant. I also know the developers of UPB personally and
>speak with them frequently, I have the knowledge from the horses mouth, so
>to speak. I am not spuoting any nonsense, as you chose to say.
>
>My point was to stress to those who have written off power line controls,
>they should re-consider. UPB is a very reliable technology. The experience
>I have with, shows that it works in any home with neutral. It is as reliable
>as a hard wired system, with out the cost. With that being said it is a
>common agreement amoung the manufacturers that support UPB that in high
>density dwellings like Apartment buildings and condos, a hard wired system
>is a better choice. In some cases it is more reliable than a hard wired
>system, for example Vantage has at least one circuit board in there that if
>it goes out, you have no lights. UPB does not have any single point of
>failure, except for a black-out...

quote:

---

> It's one thing to train others in the care and feeding of a proprietary
> system, it's another to understand the fundamentals of powerline
> communications.
>
> The fact that you had both the X-10 frequency and voltage levels wrong and
> the fact that your knpwledge of UPB appears to be based on PCS press
> releases indicate that your grasp of the fundamentals is weak.
>
> There is an "oscilloscope" screenshot of the UPB pulse on pp8-10 at...
>
> http://www.ieee-denver.org/comsoc/presentations/UPB.pdf
>
> You will find there are numerous things (e.g. triacs, ballasts, PF
> capacitors) that will put similar noise pulses on the powerline. So it's
> doubtful that the shape, position and frequency content of the pulse are
> major factors in the robustness of UPB. The fact that they use a two-way
> error correcting protocol probably has a far greater impact.
>
> HAI recommends a phase coupler for all UPB installations. Why?
>
> As I recall, UPB has a fairly low bitrate so claims that it is fast should
> be taken with a grain of salt.
>
> I may be wrong but my interpretation of Cenelec rules would mean UPB is
> illegal in Europe. (5V maximum signal strength.)
>
> Any talk of security for powerline or RF communications is ridiculous.
> Unless the system uses rolling codes it is a simple matter to capture
> codes
> and play them back - no decrypting is necessary.
>
> That powerline communications can be robust is proven by the widespread
> adoption of HomePlug's broadband over powerline. PLC broadband modules are
> retailing in the $20 range. Should someone decide to use HompePlug for
> lights and appliances, it's likely to be "lights out" for PCS and X-10.
>
> UPB may work as advertised but, so far, most of the reports here have come
> from dealers. There has been near zero feedback from end users. Given the
> high cost, it's likely to popular only with installers (if it is as robust
> as claimed). If the UPB computer interface could also do X-10, it would
> help
> with market penetration.
>
> Insteon (from SmartHome) would seem to win the published specifications
> duel. It has a high bitrate (i.e. it's fast), uses a two-way
> error-correcting protocol, is backwards compatible with X-10, uses both
> PLC
> and RF, fills the network with a 2.5V signal level (each module functions
> as
> a repeater), and doesn't cost much more than X-10. It would appear to
> comply
> with Cenelec.
>
> Again, there have been near zero end user reports on Insteon Given that
> you
> can buy a 5 module Insteon starter kit for the cost of one UPB module
> probably means we'll soon see end user reports.
>
> BTW, long runs of copper, in and of themselves, have a minimal effect of
> signal propagation. Noise, impedance mismatches and loading are the
> overwhelming cause of low signal strength.
>
> "Brett Griffin" <brett@architechtronics.spamkiller.com> wrote:
>
>

quote:

---

>I have an excellent grasp on both X-10 and UPB, I am hired frequently to
>help dealers troubleshoot either system. My training of dealers required me
>to understand both systems, in order to teach and troubleshoot problems in
>the field. You and I arguing symantics is pointless, and is losing the
>reader.
>
>You are missing the entire point of the post. I was merely explaining to
>those in the US and Canada that they should seriously take another look at
>UPB. Of course, UPB will not work in Europe, it is not even compatible with
>50 Hz.
>
>All manufacturers for liability reasons are recommending couplers, there are
>no repeaters. PCS has determined only 8% of installations require a
>coupler, and Manufacturers would rather be right 100% of the time than wrong
>8 % of the time. Recommending it reduces tech support calls.
>
>You are right the password is merely a method to reduce cross talk between
>home. the are 256 house codes 256 unit address, and a 4 digit passcode for
>the system that equates to 64,000 address, and if you throw in the passcode
>in the mix, you could infer that there is 655 million possible combinations.
>I would not say it is secure like a wireless network using a 128 bit
>encryption. As far as homeowner feedback, this is one area where no news is
>good news. You know if there were problems, they would show up in posts
>here and everywhere. It is new so we don't have many homeowner
>testimonials, but no complaints with 18 months of installation has merit
>worth considering.
>
>I have not fully reviewed Insteon, but my concern would be that it is not
>supported by any other manufacturer. I use Leviton DHC and Simply Automated
>UPB switches in my home. Most home automation controllers are supporting
>UPB and X-10. My concern about Insteon is compatibility with HAI, Elk, Home
>Logic, and others. I hope it is easy and compatible, my only thoughts about
>insteon, is "have they improved X-10" are they going to be susceptible to
>noise like X-10? Granted proper use of filter, couplers, and repeaters
>nearly always make x10 reliable.
>
>I have enjoyed this discussion, have a nice day.

quote:

---

> have
> much knowledge of the topics you are expounding on.

quote:

---

> The fact that UPB has been licensed to other manufacturers hasn't done
> anything to lower the price. X-10 was also available from many
> manufacturers. Did that make it better?

quote:

---

> In this context, your 4 digit password is just as secure as 128-bit
> encryption. Neither does a damn thing to prevent capture and playback of
> codes. If "rdjy5roigdpb8gv" floats your boat, it will float your boat no
> matter who sends it. Rolling codes are reasonably secure but are seldom
> used
> for anything other than garage doors and for arming/disarming security
> systems.

quote:

---

> I'm surprised to learn that UPB systems need a paid professional to
> troubleshoot them.

quote:

---

> I'm not arguing semantics. I'm saying flat out that you do not seem to
> have
> much knowledge of the topics you are expounding on.
>
> The fact that UPB has been licensed to other manufacturers hasn't done
> anything to lower the price. X-10 was also available from many
> manufacturers. Did that make it better?
>
> In this context, your 4 digit password is just as secure as 128-bit
> encryption. Neither does a damn thing to prevent capture and playback of
> codes. If "rdjy5roigdpb8gv" floats your boat, it will float your boat no
> matter who sends it. Rolling codes are reasonably secure but are seldom
> used
> for anything other than garage doors and for arming/disarming security
> systems.
>
> I'm surprised to learn that UPB systems need a paid professional to
> troubleshoot them.
>
> "Brett Griffin" <brett@architechtronics.spamkiller.com> wrote:
>
>

quote:

---

>Other manufacturers did a lot to the X-10 products. I would say a comment
>like that says you are not as knowledgeable as you pass your self off to be.
>Take Lightolier, They were the first company to develop and sell a solution
>to make a professional X-10 installation bullet proof. The compose and the
>firewall, virtually eliminated noise and signal quality issues, but it
>wasn't at a cost, the firewall cost upwards of a $1000, and they make the
>most expensive X-10 light switches around $100 retail. Leviton, brought
>Intellisense DHC (Decora Home Controls). Intellisense was an AGC circuit
>deigned battle the noise commonly found in residential homes. Did it work,
>yes it worked well, but it was not perfect. In my home I have a mix of
>Leviton and X-10 brand switches. I never have a problem with the Leviton
>DHC switches. The switches work wonderfully and the X-10 branded switches
>work when they want to. I dont have an option where the X-10 brands are
>because I want a non-dimming switch and there is no neutral present. Look
>at Smarthome, they are making the X-10 switches better by incorporating a
>dual technology. So yes other manufacturers make it better and cheaper.

quote:

---

>
>Well the point is they decreased the possibility of home to home
>interference.

quote:

---

>Other complaints of X-10 had to use a coupler/repeater and it is slow. What
>do you think Radio Ra uses, basically every 30 feet you need a device to
>repeat the signal to get good coverage, and Radio Ra is as slow if not
>slower than X-10. Now I am not bashing Radio RA, it is a great reliable
>technology, but it 3 times the cost of professional X-10 or UPB.

quote:

---

> "Brett Griffin" <brett@architechtronics.spamkiller.com> wrote:
>
>
> The first copy of an X-10 signal takes 11/60 of a second (0.183333333
> secs).
> Elsewhere you've said UPB takes 1/5 second (0.2 secs). Do the math.
>
> Lutron's Radio RA uses RF which travels at 186,000 miles per second taking
> .00000030547 to go 30 feet. Are you saying that Lutron repeats the signal
> sequentially? (Z-Wave apparently does this so the time required between
> any
> two end points depends on the number of hops required.) Even in a
> sequential
> system, most of the total time will be from the length of the code itself
> and Lutron RA does use a ridiculously lengthy code. Crestron crams far
> more
> information into a very short code. Insteon appears to repeat both RF and
> PLC in realtime so the only time involved is the length of the code which
> is
> very short. (I do not have hands-on experience with Insteon so I may be
> misinterpreting things.)
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "professional X-10". Most of the X-10 Pro
> modules I've seen have innards that are identical to the non-pro
> versions -
> the only difference (aside from price) being the logo on the case and
> terms
> of the warranty. Some recent modules appear to come only in Pro versions.
> UPB appears to cost 2-3 times non-pro X-10 list prices. Direct comparisons
> are difficult due to the lack of equivalent UPB devices.