Iterating / Evolving System Design

[daluza]

Background: I have a relatively new installation that I am working on with my installer.  I have many KPD-C all throughout the house and most are marginally configured to give my rudimentary lighting throughout the house while I figure out what I really want in terms of scenes and from what locations (buttons) I want them controlled.  Also, I have a development background and been HA enthusiast for years - as such I like to do as much as I can myself using HE and when I hit the limitations of HE, have my dealer do it based on a clear design description. I find my dealer likes this better as they have a list of stuff to do and can knock it out and not deal with a lot of back-and-forth questions...   Now the questions...

1) For the KPD buttons the dealer set up connections to I want change.  If I use programming to change what a button does, what happens to the preexisting connection?  Do they conflict, does the programming override the connection? (I intend to try to reuse the advanced lighting scenes where they exist, but some are just bindings from the keypad directly to the light)

 

2) Once I lock in on what I want to do, will it make sense to have the dealer change those into connections where possible (assuming I also use advanced lighting scenes wherever possible?

 

3) Once they get moved to connections, do I have to go back and clean up (delete/undo) all the programing that I did initially (like work to activate/deactivate the scenes, manage LED colors and activation, etc.)

 

4) I get that a lot of the work to make a full scenario just work (multiple KPD synchronization, LED management, etc.) is handled when using connections... but is there a performance or reliability edge to using connections versus programming? Another words, If i get it to work like I want, is it worth having my dealer even mess with them?

Thanks!

[mstafford388]

1.  You can have a connection and programming fire of with the same button press.  Obviously this could create some undesired outcomes and typically isn't best practice.  If you program something the a button the connection doesn't automatically go away.

 

2. Yes.

 

3. Yes.

 

4. You should absolutely be using connections for advanced lighting scenes with keypad buttons, simply for the ability to ramp/fade scenes with a button hold.  You can replicate the rest through programming (with a lot of work to make LEDs track properly across multiple keypads, when fired off with app vs button, etc), but the ramp/fade is a doosy to do via programming.  It can be done (timers, variables, etc), but it's not easy and won't ramp/fade as cleanly across the scene. 

[daluza]

12 minutes ago, mstafford388 said:

1.  You can have a connection and programming fire of with the same button press.  Obviously this could create some undesired outcomes and typically isn't best practice.  If you program something the a button the connection doesn't automatically go away.

 

2. Yes.

 

3. Yes.

 

4. You should absolutely be using connections for advanced lighting scenes with keypad buttons, simply for the ability to ramp/fade scenes with a button hold.  You can replicate the rest through programming (with a lot of work to make LEDs track properly across multiple keypads, when fired off with app vs button, etc), but the ramp/fade is a doosy to do via programming.  It can be done (timers, variables, etc), but it's not easy and won't ramp/fade as cleanly across the scene. 

Thanks Matt, very helpful.

[RAV]

Have the main button connect to a unique room lighting scene for each keypad.
You can then edit each lighting scene to your preference.
Other buttons you can then create your own scenes, and have them link them, or program as you see fit.

[fleon]

I actually did away with connections and went to programming only for one reason  (which takes a lot more programming, btw).  I have my "Lights"
 button cycle through scenes instead of the ramp/fade connection.   So, hit it the first time, it's bright; 2nd time it's dim; 3rd is a warmer color; 4th is reds/orange; 5th is a nightlight; 6th off.

Saves me having to use a lof of buttons or remember what single/double/triple tap does.  

So it's a preference for you.  I didn't like how connections worked for me.  And no, I don't see any speed difference.  

[daluza]

2 hours ago, fleon said:

I actually did away with connections and went to programming only for one reason  (which takes a lot more programming, btw).  I have my "Lights"
 button cycle through scenes instead of the ramp/fade connection.   So, hit it the first time, it's bright; 2nd time it's dim; 3rd is a warmer color; 4th is reds/orange; 5th is a nightlight; 6th off.

Saves me having to use a lof of buttons or remember what single/double/triple tap does.  

So it's a preference for you.  I didn't like how connections worked for me.  And no, I don't see any speed difference.  

Fleon, this is a great suggestion, and I will think about that...it might be worth the hassle to have that flexibility, I have figured out managing the LED states myself so might give it a try.

[msgreenf]

17 minutes ago, daluza said:

Fleon, this is a great suggestion, and I will think about that...it might be worth the hassle to have that flexibility, I have figured out managing the LED states myself so might give it a try.

I would not recommend programming over bindings 

[Cyknight]

On 7/1/2022 at 10:56 AM, mstafford388 said:

1.  You can have a connection and programming fire of with the same button press.  Obviously this could create some undesired outcomes and typically isn't best practice.  If you program something the a button the connection doesn't automatically go away.

 

2. Yes.

 

3. Yes.

 

4. You should absolutely be using connections for advanced lighting scenes with keypad buttons, simply for the ability to ramp/fade scenes with a button hold.  You can replicate the rest through programming (with a lot of work to make LEDs track properly across multiple keypads, when fired off with app vs button, etc), but the ramp/fade is a doosy to do via programming.  It can be done (timers, variables, etc), but it's not easy and won't ramp/fade as cleanly across the scene. 

To add:

1 You can REMOVE existing connections on a keypad (dimmer) - but you can't recreate them

2 no addition

3 Not really, a )smart) dealer will do the same thing you can do in 1 and just clear programming that way

4 no addition

 

It's NOT a bad idea to in the beginning use programming on buttons to 'figure it out' if you are an enthousiast, but as mentioned already - programming will never be quite as smooth as using connections.

 

NOTE that you can always edit any scenes connected to a button - ie of a 3 button layout has scene 1 scene 2 and scene 3 connected - you can simply edit the scenes in question, and the button will follow along.

[fleon]

5 hours ago, msgreenf said:

I would not recommend programming over bindings 

Is there a way to do what I'm doing without programming?

 

[fleon]

I also guess my house is a bit more complex than the simple things you can do with connections.  Almost every one of my buttons don't just turn on lights.  Many of mine have time conditionals, and a bunch of state checks.   

I don't see the benefit of connection bindings, I guess.

[South Africa C4 user]

1 hour ago, fleon said:

Is there a way to do what I'm doing without programming?

 

 No

[South Africa C4 user]

1 hour ago, fleon said:

I also guess my house is a bit more complex than the simple things you can do with connections.  Almost every one of my buttons don't just turn on lights.  Many of mine have time conditionals, and a bunch of state checks.   

I don't see the benefit of connection bindings, I guess.

Connections are absolutely brilliant for quick / easy setup of lights BUT leave you with a standard setup.

Programming is more flexible BUT can lead to bugs if you are not careful and requires a lot of work to get it working as smartly as connections.

Programming against “on push” is just as fast as a connection in my experience.  Programming against single, double and triple clicks adds a 1.5 second delay while C4 waits to see how often you will press the button.

Wher possible (about 80% of my lighting buttons), I use dealer setup connections.  For the other 20% I have used programming in order to get C4 to do exactly what I want.

[msgreenf]

6 hours ago, fleon said:

Is there a way to do what I'm doing without programming?

 

Yes w a 3rd party driver. 

[Neo1738]

I'm w @South Africa C4 user pretty much same breakdown and experience. 

[fleon]

7 hours ago, msgreenf said:

Yes w a 3rd party driver. 

Which one?   That might help, but I don't think there's a third party driver that does what I'm looking for.  Would love to pick up a new trick, however... 

[South Africa C4 user]

1 hour ago, fleon said:

Which one?   That might help, but I don't think there's a third party driver that does what I'm looking for.  Would love to pick up a new trick, however... 

Domosapiens have a cool driver (keypad enhancer driver) which I suspect is what @msgreenfis referring to. It certainly adds a lot of functionality to keypads and (I am sure) @pbir is always looking for suggestions to enhance the driver further .  Domosapiens have a couple of other lighting drivers which will add even more functionality.  They can all be found on DriverCentral.

[msgreenf]

Yes that is the driver I was thinking of! 

[fleon]

That's a cool driver.  But having looked at the documentation, it doesn't seem to do what I was talking about.