@NotYetRated I started with autHomation and still have it but I been using ImperiHome 90% of the time now. Until recently I couldn't use it full time due to not having multiswitch support. But now I'm I can almost say I don't need autHomation.

I'm also following along interested in the Temp, Humidity, and motion sensor.

I blame UI7 and have no idea why people use it. So many problems and I haven't found one advantage or UI5 yet.

Thanks for that info, it seems to only confirms that the meter is working right and that my problem is in the sktech. LOL

I really need help finding out why the example sketch with the "1000 blinks per kWh" set doesn't work anywhere close to where it should be.

I'm using the example sketch and my meter has 1.0kH tag on the front.

@hek said:

http://efundies.com/electricity/how_to_read_power_meter.htm

@integlikewhoa said:

i'm so lost on this. I can read the screen on the meter. I got my meter holding down to around 1.31kW according to the meter read out. I set the timer for a minute and counted the flashes on the LM393 LED. It flashed around 26 times in that min. So 60 min in an hour that's 1,560 flashes per around 1.31kWh..

Next I kicked on the AC and let the Kw reading on the meter level out around 3.10kW and then I set the timer and counted 54 pulses per min. x 60 for 3,240 per hour.

Everything looks per proportional and right along with what I found on the internet for this meter.

1,000 blinks per kWh.

Using the factory settings should put me right there is what I keep thinking. But that gets me showing 300,000 watts

using your above formula and pulses still at 1000 it still gets me in the 300,000 range.

If i change my pluse per KWh to 100,000 then it gets me into the right area at 3000 watts when my ac is on which is in the ball park but if I turn the AC off and kW drop to 1.3 ish

The serial is still showing 3,000 range in watts it wont drop to the 1,000 so watts it should be.

If you can't figure out how to post pics here, post them in the Vera Forum. Has anyone tried to help you there?

I'm on ui5 so i'm not sure how much help I can be with UI7.

UI5 was easy to get files installed and loaded and create a new device. I didn't get any startup error. But I did run into my NANO not creating a serial port in Vera so there was no option for me to make the association. Sounds like you might no have even gotten that far if you don't get a serial error.

Even without the serial connected to the VERA or the sketch on the serial nano. you should still get VERA to take the plugin and not get a start up error. You will how ever get a serial port error.

So I think your problem is VERA only at this point, having to do with the upload files and new device.

Post some screen shots so we can confirm tho.

Hoping can jump in and shed some new light on this. BUMP!

i'm so lost on this. I can read the screen on the meter. I got my meter holding down to around 1.31kW according to the meter read out. I set the timer for a minute and counted the flashes on the LM393 LED. It flashed around 26 times in that min. So 60 min in an hour that's 1,560 flashes per around 1.31kWh..

Next I kicked on the AC and let the Kw reading on the meter level out around 3.10kW and then I set the timer and counted 54 pulses per min. x 60 for 3,240 per hour.

Everything looks per proportional and right along with what I found on the internet for this meter.

1,000 blinks per kWh.

Using the factory settings should put me right there is what I keep thinking. But that gets me showing 300,000 watts

using your above formula and pulses still at 1000 it still gets me in the 300,000 range.

If i change my pluse per KWh to 100,000 then it gets me into the right area at 3000 watts when my ac is on which is in the ball park but if I turn the AC off and kW drop to 1.3 ish

The serial is still showing 3,000 range in watts it wont drop to the 1,000 so watts it should be.

@John said:

watt = (3600000000.0 * ppwh) / interval;

Well i put the Pulse count back to 1000 then I changed the formula above and now I'm getting some wierd up and down readings even tho the meter was fairly stable during this time.

sensor started, id 2
send: 2-2-0-0 s=255,c=0,t=17,pt=0,l=3,st=ok:1.4
send: 2-2-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=1,l=1,st=ok:0
read: 0-0-2 s=255,c=3,t=6,pt=0,l=2:I
send: 2-2-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=11,pt=0,l=12,st=ok:Energy Meter
send: 2-2-0-0 s=255,c=3,t=12,pt=0,l=3,st=ok:1.0
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=0,t=13,pt=0,l=3,st=ok:1.4
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=2,t=24,pt=0,l=3,st=ok:1.4
read: 0-0-2 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=0,l=6:81287
Received last pulse count from gw:81287
Watt:3609
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81316
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.3160
Watt:268656
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81351
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.3510
Watt:264861
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81389
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.3890
Watt:272975
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81415
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.4150
Watt:141464
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81421
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.4210
Watt:10582
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81448
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.4480
Watt:12944
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81471
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.4710
Watt:7069
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81473
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.4740
Watt:1215
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81479
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.4790
Watt:21161
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81510
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.5100
Watt:5983
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=24,pt=5,l=4,st=ok:81529
send: 2-2-0-0 s=1,c=1,t=18,pt=7,l=5,st=ok:81.5290

@John so I'm a bit lost (not surprised) at your formula. Can you throw some numbers in your new formula based on my information above (or fictitious numbers for an example) and give me an idea of what it should look like.

@korttoma it sure doesn't seem like if fixed much.

I'll include some pictures but I don't see anything anywhere on the meter that might give an indication of the pulses. And def. nothing around the IR. I'm also confused now how even when I got it reading right at higher usage. It didn't drop down much after I cut the usage and was still given a high reading.