INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

Posted on
Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:05 pm
tcherna offline
Posts: 9
Joined: Apr 14, 2018

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

So just migrating from 7.1 10.11 on an old Mac mini to 7.4 10.14 on a new iMac. Is it expected that the PowerLinc would fail to connect until I plug it into a KVM hub (which happens to be USB 2) as opposed to the USB 3 ports of the iMac?

Posted on
Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:38 am
jay (support) offline
Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 16108
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

PowerLincs are quite sensitive to USB versions and hubs. So, no, this isn't at all unexpected. We know that there are often times failures on hubs, and we know that there are also failures on USB3, so the trick is to find the right combination. Looks like you found it for you.

Jay (Indigo Support)
Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn

Posted on
Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:41 pm
tcherna offline
Posts: 9
Joined: Apr 14, 2018

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

Thanks Jay. It might be a good idea to update https://wiki.indigodomo.com/doku.php?id ... on_devices with a note about hubs :D

Posted on
Wed Oct 23, 2019 10:34 am
jay (support) offline
Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 16108
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

Agreed - added.

Jay (Indigo Support)
Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn

Posted on
Wed Mar 18, 2020 10:11 am
ryandenver offline
Posts: 31
Joined: Jun 18, 2019

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

Greetings.

Wondering if you've seen that there appears to be a delay either in the Indigo software or the PowerLinc Modem when using action groups triggered by an Insteon keypad. If there have been commands recently (think <1hr) things work fine. If not, and you trigger an action group, it may not respond or it takes several seconds for any of the triggered devices to respond.

I've confirmed the Mac Mini is awake to rule that out so I'm guessing it's something either in the software and/or modem.

Thoughts?

Ryan

Posted on
Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:12 pm
jay (support) offline
Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 16108
Joined: Mar 19, 2008
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

Insteon is a relatively slow protocol, and it doesn't handle signal collisions well at all. So, if lots of things are going on, then things will slow down because there will be a lot of retries for failed commands. If you are using triggers, the potential delays are added to because the signal has to go from the device to the PowerLinc, then from the PowerLinc to the device called in the action.

Indigo processing time is negligent compared to Insteon signal times. You have to spend some time "tuning" Insteon-based solutions to get the right combination of direct links (which eliminates the extra trip to the PowerLinc but also limits flexibility) and Indigo Triggers (much more flexibility, but it increases Insteon traffic).

Jay (Indigo Support)
Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn

Posted on
Wed Mar 18, 2020 3:25 pm
peszko offline
Posts: 194
Joined: Mar 07, 2012

Re: INSTEON PowerLinc Modem (2413U)

I used to have a lot of problems with a large insteon only network. I got rid of a lot of older modules and replaced them with z-wave. I especially targeted wireless modules. After removing most of the wireless sensors and the keypadlinks (those were really troublsome) my network is very solid. What I would target first is insteon sensors with triggers that end up generating a lot of insteon traffic. I would also try to avoid multiple direct commands to modules, but rather use as few as possible scene commands. I would also turn off scene cleanup. This makes insteon scenes less reliable, but greatly increases speed. I find two sucessive insteon scene commands are a lot faster then single one with the clean up (with multiple devices in the scene)

In my situation, I have left mostly second generation insteon light switches, that generally just receive commands. At this point, I'll probably leave them be until they fail and need replacement.

Insteon works well for small setups, but at certain point degrades fairly fast (inherent to the protocol). If you can, I'd look in to adding z-wave to your network and change your sensors to z-wave (especially the wireless ones)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron