When UPB generation counts

[refinished]

Would guess that this has been covered but my search turned up nothing. With regards to UPB generation and speed of link activation... I have four brands of lamp modules - a mix of Gen I and Gen II. I also have two brands of units capable of transmitting links - one Gen I wall controller and one GenII PIM. I did some testing and all of the lamp modules react very fast and within ms of each other to the GenII PIM sent links. They react with a .5s delay and within ms of each other to the GenI wall controller sent links.

Is it correct to say that the speed of reaction that is touted as a benefit of the GenII modules comes solely from the transmit side of the communication? If I get a GenII wall controller and keep the generation mix on the recieve end, can I expect wall controller response as fast as what I see from the PIM? Experience from the crowd here?

 

[electron]

Very interesting observation, looking forward to seeing the responses.

 

[fcwilt]

Well the default setting for many UPB dimmers was a delay of 750ms in reacting to the single click of the swtich. The purpose of the delay is to determine if you are doing a double click. If a second click doesn't occur within the delay time the single click command is issued. Most of my UPB devices allow me to reduce this delay setting significantly. In fact it could be reduced to zero if no action was assigned for double click but I don't know if any vendor has done that.

Most of what I read about GEN-II had to do with increased tolerance to noise.

 

[Steve]

The delay Frederick mentioned is local load, not links. I did not think that Gen II did anything with speed of links but I could be wrong. I know I have used Gen I devices to send links to other Gen I devices and they react immediately, so not sure if that is an issue with the setup or what.

 

[refinished]

The delay Frederick mentioned is local load, not links. I did not think that Gen II did anything with speed of links but I could be wrong. I know I have used Gen I devices to send links to other Gen I devices and they react immediately, so not sure if that is an issue with the setup or what.

Am I crazy or have I read many comments in many places that the GenII business reduces the activation latency?

 

[nightwalker]

As far as I understood things the gen2 devices did not effect links, they were always instant, it was the manual triggering of a switch. There was a slight delay for the switch to sense if you were single tapping or double tapping.

 

[Event5]

The delay Frederick mentioned is local load, not links. I did not think that Gen II did anything with speed of links but I could be wrong. I know I have used Gen I devices to send links to other Gen I devices and they react immediately, so not sure if that is an issue with the setup or what.

Am I crazy or have I read many comments in many places that the GenII business reduces the activation latency?

The delay "everyone" has talked about refers only to the local load when activated by a rocker push. It does not have anything to do with Link controls. As stated above early UPB switches when activated by a rocker push for the local load waited to see if there was a second press and that wait time resulted in an unacceptable delay for some users.

All manufactures of UPB products made changes to correct/modify this problem to reduce the delay to acceptable levels. These changes were not Gen 11 changes.

These changes occurred about the same time as Gen11 came out, BUT, I repeat, were not part of Gen11

Gen11 was created to reduce a devices sensitive to noise, if there was certain types of noise in the environment.

Gen1 or Gen11, Links are activated the same.

This is the simple answer. Others have gone into more detail else ware.

Hope this helps
Dave

 

[refinished]

The delay Frederick mentioned is local load, not links. I did not think that Gen II did anything with speed of links but I could be wrong. I know I have used Gen I devices to send links to other Gen I devices and they react immediately, so not sure if that is an issue with the setup or what.

Am I crazy or have I read many comments in many places that the GenII business reduces the activation latency?

The delay "everyone" has talked about refers only to the local load when activated by a rocker push. It does not have anything to do with Link controls. As stated above early UPB switches when activated by a rocker push for the local load waited to see if there was a second press and that wait time resulted in an unacceptable delay for some users.

All manufactures of UPB products made changes to correct/modify this problem to reduce the delay to acceptable levels. These changes were not Gen 11 changes.

These changes occurred about the same time as Gen11 came out, BUT, I repeat, were not part of Gen11

Gen11 was created to reduce a devices sensitive to noise, if there was certain types of noise in the environment.

Gen1 or Gen11, Links are activated the same.

This is the simple answer. Others have gone into more detail else ware.

Hope this helps
Dave

That clears up my confusion - thanks.

 

[WayneW]

That clears up my confusion - thanks.

Well, that doesn't clear up my confusion from the issue raised in your first post. :blink:

I have four brands of lamp modules - a mix of Gen I and Gen II.
I also have two brands of units capable of transmitting links - one Gen I wall controller and one GenII PIM.
I did some testing and all of the lamp modules react very fast and within ms of each other to the GenII PIM sent links.
They react with a .5s delay and within ms of each other to the GenI wall controller sent links.

Are you saying the lamp modules react quicker when controlled remotely by a GenII PIM than when controlled remotely by a GenI wall controller?

All UPB experts: Is a PIM (any generation) known to be faster than a wall controller (any generation)?

refinished's post would imply there might be a speed advantage to using a GenII PIM over a GenI PIM, has anybody else seen this?

 

[refinished]

That clears up my confusion - thanks.

Well, that doesn't clear up my confusion from the issue raised in your first post. :blink:

I have four brands of lamp modules - a mix of Gen I and Gen II.
I also have two brands of units capable of transmitting links - one Gen I wall controller and one GenII PIM.
I did some testing and all of the lamp modules react very fast and within ms of each other to the GenII PIM sent links.
They react with a .5s delay and within ms of each other to the GenI wall controller sent links.

Are you saying the lamp modules react quicker when controlled remotely by a GenII PIM than when controlled remotely by a GenI wall controller?

All UPB experts: Is a PIM (any generation) known to be faster than a wall controller (any generation)?

refinished's post would imply there might be a speed advantage to using a GenII PIM over a GenI PIM, has anybody else seen this?

Very noticeably quicker. I'd be interested to learn, if there is more to this.... I find the delay annoying.

The bits:
PCS PIM - Link activated from UPStart
SA US2-40 Wall controller - Link sent by single tap
and
PCS Lamp module
HAI Lamp module
SA Lamp module
HAL Lamp module

 

[Steve]

I kind of find that hard to believe that there is a difference between a PIM and US240 in sending links. To really answer the question we need to know more detail on how things are programmed. Is it all just peer to peer or using some sort of controller or software? How did you program the US240, did you change the default so a single press sends a link vs controlling local load? Part of it may be 'perception' since on one you are initiating action by pressing a physical switch and the other is initiated via a mouse click.

I have a Gen II PCS PIM and US240 as well as a few modules. If you tell us exactly how you have it programmed I can try to reproduce your exact scenario.

 

[Event5]

Would guess that this has been covered but my search turned up nothing. With regards to UPB generation and speed of link activation... I have four brands of lamp modules - a mix of Gen I and Gen II. I also have two brands of units capable of transmitting links - one Gen I wall controller and one GenII PIM. I did some testing and all of the lamp modules react very fast and within ms of each other to the GenII PIM sent links. They react with a .5s delay and within ms of each other to the GenI wall controller sent links.

Is it correct to say that the speed of reaction that is touted as a benefit of the GenII modules comes solely from the transmit side of the communication? If I get a GenII wall controller and keep the generation mix on the recieve end, can I expect wall controller response as fast as what I see from the PIM? Experience from the crowd here?

refering back to your original question; are you sending a series of links, one to each module or are you sending a single link that all 4 modules see? If you send a single link that all 4 see they should react at the same time.

Dave

 

[fcwilt]

Now I'm confused.

While I see in UPstart where it states the the adjustable delay only applies to the local load I don't see how links can be instant.

I'm am looking at the configuration pages in UPstart for a SA US2-40. Under "Transmit Components" it shows two items, Top Super Rocker and Bottom Super Rocker. For each there is a command for Single-Tap, Double-Tap, Hold and Release. I can change either of these two items to a different mode, say Custom.

When in Custom mode, I can set Single-Tap to "Snap On" and Double-Tap to "Slow On".

If there is do delay to wait to see if the switch has been double tapped, then the "Snap On" would always be sent and then the "Slow On" would be sent if it was a double-tap. Does this occur?

And without some sort of defined time interval how can you differentiate between a double-tap and two single-taps?

As I see it there are only two ways to implement single/double tapping.

The Windows way where the action for single clicking (tapping if you will) always takes place and then if another click occurs within a defined time interval then the double click action takes place. With this approach the double click action is somewhat limited in what can be done in that it will always take place after the single click action.

The other approach is to wait after the first click for a fixed amount of time to see if a second click occurs. If it does then the double click action takes place otherwise the single click action takes place. The result of this approach will be that the single click action will not be instant but the single click action and the double click action can be totally unrelated.

Since UPstart allows "Snap On" for single-tap and "Slow On' for double-tap it would seem to suggest that UPB devices use the second approach where there always be a delay while the single/double tap is sorted out.

So it seems that I will be doing some testing to try and understand what is going on.

 

[refinished]

Would guess that this has been covered but my search turned up nothing. With regards to UPB generation and speed of link activation... I have four brands of lamp modules - a mix of Gen I and Gen II. I also have two brands of units capable of transmitting links - one Gen I wall controller and one GenII PIM. I did some testing and all of the lamp modules react very fast and within ms of each other to the GenII PIM sent links. They react with a .5s delay and within ms of each other to the GenI wall controller sent links.

Is it correct to say that the speed of reaction that is touted as a benefit of the GenII modules comes solely from the transmit side of the communication? If I get a GenII wall controller and keep the generation mix on the recieve end, can I expect wall controller response as fast as what I see from the PIM? Experience from the crowd here?

refering back to your original question; are you sending a series of links, one to each module or are you sending a single link that all 4 modules see? If you send a single link that all 4 see they should react at the same time.

Dave

The tapping is sending a single link. The modules all respond to the link. My testing has included sending commands from Upstart by activating the links (right click on the link definition), addressing the device directly (right click on the device) and by tapping the US2-40. FWIW, there is no local load on the US2-40.

 

[fcwilt]

Well testing with a US2-40 with firmware 1.10 seems to confirm that single-tap and double-tap behavior are unique. I programmed the device to send Snap-On for single-tap and Slow-On for double-tap. It worked correctly. So it seems to me that to avoid sending the single-tap action the switch must wait a bit to see if the second tap occurs. For this version of the firmware there is no setting for any such delay. Neither is there a setting for the "local load response time".