💬 Relay

sineverba

@Boots33

Never seen the request function.
You are hero-member for a reason...
Thank you very much! :) :)

Boots33

@sineverba said in 💬 Relay:

Never seen the request function.

You can find request and other useful info on the API page.
Hope you are enjoying your MySensors journey :)

fhenryco

Hello,

since the relay has leds and is therefore power consuming, i was wondering if someone has written a sketch for a low power usage of the relay (as for the sensors) allowing the arduino (and the relay) to sleep all the time and wake up every 5 minutes for instance just to check if the controller has changed the desired state of the switch.

Of course then the relay could be as late as 5minute, but this is not an issue for my application ...

thanks for any suggestion

mfalkvidd

@fhenryco can't the relay node use power from whatever it is controlling?

For sleeping nodes, the smartsleep feature can be useful. Search for that keyword in the forum and look at https://www.mysensors.org/download/sensor_api_20#sleeping

fhenryco

thanks , indeed it's because the relay is controlling a 12V battery power to solenoid valve , that low power consumption is needed. BTW the 12V is obtained from a 4S lipo (16.5V max voltage) and a 12 regulator and i dont know if its better to feed the arduino from a 5V regulator fed by the same Lipo , or use an additional set of AA batteries ... i remember that it's better to have an as low as possible drop in voltage to save power...

Boots33

@fhenryco If you are trying to keep your power use down then you could also consider using either a Latching Relay or even a MOSFET.

fhenryco

@mfalkvidd smartsleep was not supported by domoticz at the begining of the year ... but there was a domoticz upgrade in july ... do you know if it's now supported ?

gohan

@Boots33 said in 💬 Relay:

@fhenryco If you are trying to keep your power use down then you could also consider using either a Latching Relay or even a MOSFET.

Agreed, if you want to save power you need to use a latching relay. Also another regulator would be fine to power the arduino.

fhenryco

@gohan can you explain the benefit (for a low power app) of a relay switching on electrical pulse rather something else ?
i mean, even the regular relay has both an open by default circuit output and close by default circuit ouput so it could remain on the desired state even when not powered up ...

gohan

I am referring that when relay is on it is drawing power to stay on, while a latching relay it only draws power during the switch on and only during the switch off.

fhenryco

@gohan not sure this is going to be an easy way: need find arduino code for latch relay, dont know if domoticz is supporting this device ?, ...

gohan

Domoticz will just see the same relay node, it is the code that need to be a little different as the relay is switched with a pulse and you need a pin to verify the relay status (if you get the ones that have a monitoring contact)

amemo06

Hi Everyone,
maybe the below will help people facing random incorrect behaviors.
In sample from december 2016 /mysensors/MySensors/examples/RelayActuator/RelayActuator.ino, there is something which could be seen as a bug.

In my case, I have used that sample to control a lot of relais. I noticed some rare but really annoying errors. From time to time a relay got switched incorrectly.
Annoying and strange as coding was pretty straightforward. All relais are coded to act in pulse mode.

          digitalWrite(message.sensor-1+RELAY_1, RELAY_OFF);
          wait(1000);
          digitalWrite(message.sensor-1+RELAY_1, RELAY_ON);

And this is the reason of the bug.

Explanation.
During that second of wait, a lot of things may occurs. Due to the 'message' declaration, it is possible that the 'message' is getting changed.
Typically a ping may come and as result the 'message' is not anymore the same.

For that reason I would suggest the code to be changed a little bit.

void receive(const MyMessage &message_orig)
{
  MyMessage message;
  message = message_orig;

This way, the function works with a local copy and you are sure nothing can change during the processing.

Anyway, thanks for the sample it was nevertheless very helpful

BulldogLowell

@amemo06

void receive(const MyMessage &message)

Because of the const keyword this is a const reference or said another way, a reference to a constant. The const keyword guarantees that the function may not change the object.

So, I wonder what your real issue is....

amemo06

@BulldogLowell No This is not the coding of the function which changes it. It is most likely the event which triggers it which may changes it.
I can show the coding with trace and trace result.

void receive(const MyMessage &message)
//void receive(const MyMessage &message_orig)
{
//  MyMessage message;
//  message = message_orig;
  Serial.println("receive_in:");
Serial.print("1st read:Sensor=");Serial.print(message.sensor);Serial.print(", getBool=");Serial.println(message.getBool());
  // We only expect one type of message from controller. But we better check anyway.
  if (message.type==V_STATUS) {
    // Change relay state
    if (message.getBool() == RELAY_ON){
      digitalWrite(message.sensor-1+RELAY_1, RELAY_OFF);
Serial.print("2nd read:Sensor=");Serial.print(message.sensor);Serial.print(", getBool=");Serial.println(message.getBool());
      wait(1000);
      digitalWrite(message.sensor-1+RELAY_1, RELAY_ON);
Serial.print("3rd read:Sensor=");Serial.print(message.sensor);Serial.print(", getBool=");Serial.println(message.getBool());      
    }
Serial.println("receive_out:");
}

Below is a normal trace

0;255;3;0;9;Eth: 0;0;3;0;18;PING
0;255;3;0;9;Eth: 0;1;1;0;2;1
receive_in:
1st read:Sensor=1, getBool=1
2nd read:Sensor=1, getBool=1
3rd read:Sensor=1, getBool=1
receive_out

So you see the ping which occured before the message I'm interested in
Now, because of the wait in the middle of the code, it may occurs the ping arrive in that period. Then the issue occurs.
See the trace with error.

0;255;3;0;9;Eth: 0;1;1;0;2;1
receive_in:
1st read:Sensor=1, getBool=1
2nd read:Sensor=1, getBool=1
0;255;3;0;9;Eth: 0;0;3;0;18;PING
3rd read:Sensor=0, getBool=0
receive_out

In the 3rd read, sensor value has changed and getBool returns also a different value.

Removing the wait or ensuring the function modules performs faster could reduce the risk. Still it will never be reliable.
Better is to have either a local copy of the message like I wrote in the original post. Or make immediately copies of the information from the message I'm interested in.

gohan

@amemo06 said in 💬 Relay:

wait(1000);

where did you find that? I wasn't able to find it

amemo06

@gohan This is not in the original coding. I needed something like a wait in order to make a relay pulse.
The wait increases the risk or the frequency of the trouble. Removing it does not solves the issue.
Processing of the function will always take time. And the message can still changes before reaching the end like it is show in the second trace.

BulldogLowell

@amemo06

You should treat the message like an ISR... get in and out so that you don't have another message colliding while you are in the function.

Get rid of that wait(). I couldn't find the source for that function but you could try to just use delay() to block while you hold the relay.

otherwise just set a flag to handle the relay event in loop() or use a Timer/callback like the MsTimer2 Library

example:

#include <MsTimer2.h>

const byte onButton = 5;

void setup()
{
  Serial.begin(9600);
  pinMode(13, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(onButton, INPUT_PULLUP);
}

void loop()
{
  if(onButtonPressed())
  {
   flashLedThirteen(5000);
  }
}

bool onButtonPressed(void)
{
  static unsigned long lastMillis = 0;
  static byte lastPress = HIGH;
  byte currentPress = digitalRead(onButton);
  if(currentPress != lastPress)
  {
    if(millis() - lastMillis < 200) return false;
    lastPress = currentPress;
    if(currentPress == LOW)
    {
      Serial.println(" button press detected!");
      lastMillis = millis();
      return true;
    }
  }
  return false;
}

void flashLedThirteen(int ledTime)
{
  digitalWrite(13, HIGH);
  Serial.println("LED ON");
  // sets a new timer callback function
  MsTimer2::set(ledTime, [] {  // the square brackets define the start of the anonymous callback function which is executed after 5000 milliseconds in this example
    digitalWrite(13, LOW);
    Serial.println("Timer expired...");
    Serial.println("LED OFF");
    MsTimer2::stop();
  }); // the curly brace defines the end of the anonymous callback function
  MsTimer2::start();
}

amemo06

@BulldogLowell said in 💬 Relay:

MsTimer2::

Thanks for the MSTimer, I was not aware of it.
And yes, definitively, having a wait() is probably the worst I could have written. Active wait cannot stay.
My intention, in the stuff I develop, was to remove it asap and probably by handling the wait time in the loop with flags.

Maybe I was not clear enough about my intention when I opened this thread. I have no issue with what I develop. I already had several ways to solves this. And now, I have a new one with MSTimer. Again thanks.

I only wanted to raise the fact void receive(const MyMessage &message) may lead to trouble as 'message' content may change during processing of that function.
And if, like many, you are not skilled enough to code/debug.., you will face erratic issues and real difficulty to understand what is going wrong.

BulldogLowell

@amemo06

I only wanted to raise the fact void receive(const MyMessage &message) may lead to trouble as 'message' content may change during processing of that function.

As I already explained... message cannot change during the function, because of constness.

The message handler is being called again from within itself (i.e. from wait()). You would then processing any new messages on that call. It looks as if the function may not be designed to perform recursively as you are trying to do in your code, so that would explain your unexpected/undefined results.

So yes, block during the relay's holding state or use another non-blocking method (i.e. flag or timer/callback) as you mentioned. Fully process each message before allowing the library to handle subsequent message calls.

;)

💬 Relay

16

11.7k

11.2k

113.0k