Leviton VRUSB owners: Do you have it working?

IVB

IVB

Senior Member
(just created a post on the CQC forums, will do it here too.)
 
I've been posting over there about my inability to get this #*#%*%*##(# VRUSB stick to be recognized by the RF Installer software, as in, not even a CQC issue but a Leviton issue.
 
For the Leviton VRUSB owners, whats your experience? Pls vote in the poll. (btw i tried calling leviton just now. Its 10:45am PST and both online chat and their help desk are closed. I hope its based in new england and they're buried under a few feet of snow, cuz thats just silly).
 
god damnit, Amazon. A long time back, return period long gone. I tried this a while ago, got frustrated, couldn't get a hold of Leviton back then, then got distracted. Wife just asked me to get the zWave locks under control so I just tried again.
 
I s'pose i'm throwing this one away and buying one from AO.
 
I receive a vrusb from amazon today, and it is working fine on a win 7 notebook.
 
In particular, I've included two zwave locks (yale) without any issues.
 
What version of the installer tool are you using? The 1.1.1.3 had some issues and they pulled it back. Could be related?
 
Frunple said:
What version of the installer tool are you using? The 1.1.1.3 had some issues and they pulled it back. Could be related?
Click to expand...
1.1.2.0, the one on their website.
 
I also have 1.1.2.0, and that worked ok under win 7.
 
I did have an odd issue when I "included" locks successfully, could control them from vrusb but could not control from vrc0p+3.  It looked as if no association was created between the locks and the serial module.  I tried to create the associations manually from hyperterm but with no success. Only when I re-included vrc0p+3 with an id higher than those of the locks, it started working associations and all.  Is it a known problem, that vrc0p must have an id higher than locks ?  Seems odd. I later found an article stating the same (vrc0p id > lock id).
 
After you include all the locks, you should use the Network>Program Entire Network option. If that doesn't work, then use Diagnostic>Update Routes>Update Controllers.
 
Unfortunately, sometimes the RFIT does not correctly synchronize the locks with VRC03+3. The lock has to excluded/included and update controllers.
 
An assocation is not required for the lock to open/close. The association is only for event reporting.
 
I have 1.1.3.0 working fine with Win7 x64. I don't know why Leviton pulled the release from Website.
 
An assocation is not required for the lock to open/close. The association is only for event reporting.
 
Actually, my problem was not related to associating the lock to vrc0p as you correctly noticed but rather to the fact that vrc0p had been included as a non-secure  device until I reincluded it. I do not think anymore that the vcr0p node id matters wrt other node ids.
 
Regarding lock associations, can a lock be associated to two controllers, say vrc0p and vera lite ?
 
Associations are done by groups, so for each piece of info a module wants to provide asynchronously it will define a group. Each group will be able to hold some number of ids of other modules to send that info to. Sometimes it might be one, sometimes it might be a considerably larger number. Unfortunately that's one of those things left to the manufacturer.
 
A Kwikset Z-Wave lock only supports one association (VRC0P+3). I am not sure about the other major manufacturers. If you had advanced Z-Wave integration requirement (support for lots of different devices), then CQC/Vera/ISY with Elk integration module could relay or post events to Elk.
 
Good find on document above. I found equivalent document - http://s7d5.scene7.com/is/content/BDHHI/ApplicationNote-UsingASCII-Z-Wave-Locks. It appears that Yale locks expose some addition capabilities as compared to Kwikset. Yale locks seems to allow configuration of keypad failures, auto lock, and vacation mode.
 
There have been many positive comments on Yale locks in regards to Z-Wave. I would switch to Yale, but I am strongly attached to the Kwikset’s SmartKey.
 
I would like to see all the lock companies support high powered and startup inclusion (same for Leviton devices too). I am getting tired of walking around house whenever I have to exclude a device and everyones routing table has to be updated.
 
d.dennerline said:
Good find on document above. I found equivalent document - http://s7d5.scene7.com/is/content/BDHHI/ApplicationNote-UsingASCII-Z-Wave-Locks. It appears that Yale locks expose some addition capabilities as compared to Kwikset. Yale locks seems to allow configuration of keypad failures, auto lock, and vacation mode.
 
There have been many positive comments on Yale locks in regards to Z-Wave. I would switch to Yale, but I am strongly attached to the Kwikset’s SmartKey.
 
I would like to see all the lock companies support high powered and startup inclusion (same for Leviton devices too). I am getting tired of walking around house whenever I have to exclude a device and everyones routing table has to be updated.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, I am pretty happy with mine.  I'd used them for about 3 mo before including them into my zwave network recently which is controlled by ELK through vrc0p+3.
 
I wanted to play with aditional lock capabilities using a different zwave controller since elk support for locks is pretty rudimentary(although probably sufficient for base functionality), but cannot decide which one to get. Vera lite seems like the only reasonable choice despite tons of negative comments on the micasaverde forum. UD zwave implementation seems to ne not quite mature yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top