x10 Question

[garrett]

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.

 

[LL]

Is it an incandescent light?
Does the wattage exceed the rating of the x10 module?
Have you tried a different x10 module? Maybe the module got "zapped".

Larry

On Wed, 9 May 2007 08:37:45 -0400, "garrett"
<philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.

 

[garrett]

The lamp has a 300 watt halogen bulb. The module says it is 120 volts and
15A. I think I have a manual that came with the lamp, but I don't know much
about electronics talk so you can tell me what to look for if you want me to
find anymore data about the rating. I tried a bunch of modules, but they all
did the same thing.

Garrett
"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mkh443h19sp7ptrfo756n0mntfa78qk5nf@4ax.com...

Is it an incandescent light?
Does the wattage exceed the rating of the x10 module?
Have you tried a different x10 module? Maybe the module got "zapped".

Larry

On Wed, 9 May 2007 08:37:45 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and
off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 10 May 2007 16:34:58 -0400, "garrett"
<philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

The lamp has a 300 watt halogen bulb. The module says it is 120 volts and
15A. I think I have a manual that came with the lamp, but I don't know much
about electronics talk so you can tell me what to look for if you want me to
find anymore data about the rating. I tried a bunch of modules, but they all
did the same thing.

---
First, both of you, learn to bottom post and practice it until it
becomes a habit. This isn't email, where the single recipient of
your communications already knows what you're talking about, this is
USENET.

By top posting you're muddying the chronological sequence of the
question and answer chain and if someone happens to jump in and read
the latest post, and they're interested in finding out more about
the thread, it makes it very awkward to do that if the thread is
top-posted.
---

Garrett
"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mkh443h19sp7ptrfo756n0mntfa78qk5nf@4ax.com...
Is it an incandescent light?
Does the wattage exceed the rating of the x10 module?
Have you tried a different x10 module? Maybe the module got "zapped".

Larry

On Wed, 9 May 2007 08:37:45 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and
off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.

--
JF

 

[Rev. 11D Meow!]

TOP-Posting ROCKS!

For those of us that can LEARN to read UseNet.


No need to scroll-down through stuff that has ALREADY BEEN READ!

Besides, a bling guy working at NASA taught me.

I already know what people have already said on this topic.

Why waste MY cpu and Brain time hearing it all over
and over and over and over AGAIN?

Maroon


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsi47435nq1r9tb1krq9eg8vrkfvnl5j7pp@4ax.com...

On Thu, 10 May 2007 16:34:58 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

The lamp has a 300 watt halogen bulb. The module says it is 120 volts and
15A. I think I have a manual that came with the lamp, but I don't know
much
about electronics talk so you can tell me what to look for if you want me
to
find anymore data about the rating. I tried a bunch of modules, but they
all
did the same thing.

---
First, both of you, learn to bottom post and practice it until it
becomes a habit. This isn't email, where the single recipient of
your communications already knows what you're talking about, this is
USENET.

By top posting you're muddying the chronological sequence of the
question and answer chain and if someone happens to jump in and read
the latest post, and they're interested in finding out more about
the thread, it makes it very awkward to do that if the thread is
top-posted.
---

Garrett
"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mkh443h19sp7ptrfo756n0mntfa78qk5nf@4ax.com...
Is it an incandescent light?
Does the wattage exceed the rating of the x10 module?
Have you tried a different x10 module? Maybe the module got "zapped".

Larry

On Wed, 9 May 2007 08:37:45 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and
off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this
happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.




--
JF

 

[Rev. 11D Meow!]

If you can't figure-out what and where the thread is heading
by YOU developing Scolliosis,
please feel free to contact your
local Ergonomics Chapter.


"Rev. 11D Meow!" <Jimmy@Crack.corn> wrote in message
news:O56dne7fWZA-Zt7bnZ2dnUVZ_rGinZ2d@comcast.com...

TOP-Posting ROCKS!

For those of us that can LEARN to read UseNet.


No need to scroll-down through stuff that has ALREADY BEEN READ!

Besides, a bling guy working at NASA taught me.

I already know what people have already said on this topic.

Why waste MY cpu and Brain time hearing it all over
and over and over and over AGAIN?

Maroon


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsi47435nq1r9tb1krq9eg8vrkfvnl5j7pp@4ax.com...
On Thu, 10 May 2007 16:34:58 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

The lamp has a 300 watt halogen bulb. The module says it is 120 volts and
15A. I think I have a manual that came with the lamp, but I don't know
much
about electronics talk so you can tell me what to look for if you want me
to
find anymore data about the rating. I tried a bunch of modules, but they
all
did the same thing.

---
First, both of you, learn to bottom post and practice it until it
becomes a habit. This isn't email, where the single recipient of
your communications already knows what you're talking about, this is
USENET.

By top posting you're muddying the chronological sequence of the
question and answer chain and if someone happens to jump in and read
the latest post, and they're interested in finding out more about
the thread, it makes it very awkward to do that if the thread is
top-posted.
---

Garrett
"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mkh443h19sp7ptrfo756n0mntfa78qk5nf@4ax.com...
Is it an incandescent light?
Does the wattage exceed the rating of the x10 module?
Have you tried a different x10 module? Maybe the module got "zapped".

Larry

On Wed, 9 May 2007 08:37:45 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and
off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and
off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this
happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.




--
JF

 

[Rev. 11D Meow!]

In other words, Top-Posting WORKS
for people that have been folloring the thread all along.

THE MINORITY are the people that just joined in.

If they are smart, they hit Ctrl-End and read from the bottom-up.

THE MAJORITY are the people that have ALREADY READ IT!


"Rev. 11D Meow!" <Jimmy@Crack.corn> wrote in message
news:O56dne7fWZA-Zt7bnZ2dnUVZ_rGinZ2d@comcast.com...

TOP-Posting ROCKS!

For those of us that can LEARN to read UseNet.


No need to scroll-down through stuff that has ALREADY BEEN READ!

Besides, a bling guy working at NASA taught me.

I already know what people have already said on this topic.

Why waste MY cpu and Brain time hearing it all over
and over and over and over AGAIN?

Maroon


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newsi47435nq1r9tb1krq9eg8vrkfvnl5j7pp@4ax.com...
On Thu, 10 May 2007 16:34:58 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

The lamp has a 300 watt halogen bulb. The module says it is 120 volts and
15A. I think I have a manual that came with the lamp, but I don't know
much
about electronics talk so you can tell me what to look for if you want me
to
find anymore data about the rating. I tried a bunch of modules, but they
all
did the same thing.

---
First, both of you, learn to bottom post and practice it until it
becomes a habit. This isn't email, where the single recipient of
your communications already knows what you're talking about, this is
USENET.

By top posting you're muddying the chronological sequence of the
question and answer chain and if someone happens to jump in and read
the latest post, and they're interested in finding out more about
the thread, it makes it very awkward to do that if the thread is
top-posted.
---

Garrett
"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:mkh443h19sp7ptrfo756n0mntfa78qk5nf@4ax.com...
Is it an incandescent light?
Does the wattage exceed the rating of the x10 module?
Have you tried a different x10 module? Maybe the module got "zapped".

Larry

On Wed, 9 May 2007 08:37:45 -0400, "garrett"
philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

Hi,

I use x10 Powerline Communication to allow me to switch devices on and
off.
I use x10 modules plugged into devices that switch the power on and
off.
One lamp I have plugged into the module seems to draw too much current.
When I turn the module off with an x10 signal, the light goes off for a
couple seconds, but then turns back on. Does anyone know why this
happens
or a way around the problem?

Thanks.




--
JF

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:14:12 -0700, "Rev. 11D Meow!"
<Jimmy@Crack.corn> wrote:

TOP-Posting ROCKS!

---
No, it doesn't. Top-posting is evidence of the top-poster's
egotistical attitude or ignorance of a newsgroup's culture.
---

For those of us that can LEARN to read UseNet.

---
JF

You apparently want to force others to adapt to an artificial style
of which you approve, since you consider yourself to be among the
"elite" who should dictate a newsgroup's culture.

This continues across multiple pages so that the story ends when
there is no more text at the _bottom_ of the article. Just like a
book, where you don't start reading from the end to the beginning.

Reading USENET should be no different from reading any other
serially worded material and, in English, is taught as being done in
a raster-scan like manner from the upper left corner of the page to
the bottom right.

---

No need to scroll-down through stuff that has ALREADY BEEN READ!

Besides, a bling guy working at NASA taught me.

---
Badly, it seems.
---

I already know what people have already said on this topic.

Why waste MY cpu and Brain time hearing it all over
and over and over and over AGAIN?

---
Why waste everyone else's by having to be told over
and over and over and over AGAIN that, when in Rome, do as the
Romans do?

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:18:43 -0700, "Rev. 11D Meow!"
<Jimmy@Crack.corn> wrote:

In other words, Top-Posting WORKS
for people that have been folloring the thread all along.

---
Nope. If one person decides to reply to a post and top-posts, you
can rest assured that there will be many more who will read the
thread and be inconvenienced by the forced bottom-up structure.
---

THE MINORITY are the people that just joined in.

---
Nope. read the preceding.
---

If they are smart, they hit Ctrl-End and read from the bottom-up.

---
The intelligence of the reader isn't the issue, the top-poster's
demands that they be forced to accept an unnatural style of reading
is.


--
JF

 

[LL]

Anyone going to answer the question, instead of debating the
intricacies of top vs. bottom posting???

Did you try to swap the module with another, in case the original is
broke???



Larry



On Fri, 11 May 2007 07:22:26 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:18:43 -0700, "Rev. 11D Meow!"
Jimmy@Crack.corn> wrote:

In other words, Top-Posting WORKS
for people that have been folloring the thread all along.

---
Nope. If one person decides to reply to a post and top-posts, you
can rest assured that there will be many more who will read the
thread and be inconvenienced by the forced bottom-up structure.
---

THE MINORITY are the people that just joined in.

---
Nope. read the preceding.
---

If they are smart, they hit Ctrl-End and read from the bottom-up.

---
The intelligence of the reader isn't the issue, the top-poster's
demands that they be forced to accept an unnatural style of reading
is.

 

[garrett]

"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:lqog43lslfq897khv4q4ieoqpfp5e4clqg@4ax.com...

Anyone going to answer the question, instead of debating the
intricacies of top vs. bottom posting???

Did you try to swap the module with another, in case the original is
broke???



Larry

Did you get my message that the bulb was 300 watts halogen and the module
was rated at 30 amps? The voltage is standard 120 volts. Are there any
other numbers you need that would help? I tried other modules, but they had
the same problem.

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 16 May 2007 08:48:24 -0400, "garrett"
<philliesfan25@earthlink.net> wrote:

"LL" <NOSPAMldittoecom@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:lqog43lslfq897khv4q4ieoqpfp5e4clqg@4ax.com...

---
Snipped insipid drivel.
---

Did you get my message that the bulb was 300 watts halogen and the module
was rated at 30 amps? The voltage is standard 120 volts. Are there any
other numbers you need that would help? I tried other modules, but they had
the same problem.

---
Thanks for bottom posting.

With 120V mains, a 300 watt load will only draw 2.5 amps, so that's
certainly well within the range of your 30 amp module.

Since you've tried several modules and the problem persists, then
it's not in the modules, so it may be in the controller. Check to
see whether you have it programmed to issue an ON command a few
seconds after you press the OFF button. It's also possible that you
could be interacting with another system in one of your neighbors'
houses, (If you share a mains transformer) so you may want to try
changing the channel to see if that helps. Also, try plugging in,
say, a 100 watt lamp with the controller set like it is now just to
see what happens.

Which controller are you using, BTW?



--
JF

 

[Coyoteboy]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:bmk84395c2rr37gg87kruvnfk4a1n0t6rm@4ax.com...

Why waste everyone else's by having to be told over
and over and over and over AGAIN that, when in Rome, do as the
Romans do?

I must admit, I learned to bottom post when I first started on USENET. But
I've never understood why it was so frowned upon to top post.
For a start, most newbies to USENET top post. Why make it "difficult" for
them and require it to be the wrong way round? And most people snip the post
to contain only the last question and answer anyway, and it takes less time
and effort to read the top of the post to get the latest answer. When
replying to / reading emails most people start at the top and read top-down
for history. This is a natural format on a computer system which defaults to
viewing the top of a document first - a usenet thread is a chronologically
ordered sequence of information, it make no difference the information
content whether it works top down or bottom up - if everyone had started top
posting it would be the norm (and make more sense as the computer defaults
to viewing the latest information. You dont start looking for the latest
version of code by searching through all the SVN history, you skip to the
latest version, then look back if you need to debug.

I've read posts that were 4-5 pages long, sure reading downwards meant I
read all the info, but since I didnt NEED that info it might as well have
stayed off-screen and just showed me the top. That way I could also just
scroll down one post at a time until i understood the crux of the post,
instead of having to read all the fragments of post (with bits snipped out
so it doesnt make complete sense anyway).
There used to be the case where news servers didnt propogate the posts fast
enough and you could end up with out-of-sequence replies, hence the extra
info in the post was helpful, but with modern technology thats rarely an
issue anymore?

Anyway, not wishing to cause an argument, just thinking outloud really. I
dont care either way - Im used to bottom-posting, its just always struck me
as odd.

 

[JeffM]

Coyoteboy wrote:

I must admit, I learned to bottom post when I first started on USENET.

Then do continue.

This goes directly to your *newbies* point below.

But I've never understood why it was so frowned upon to top post.

A Usenet post should read like a conversation.

Adapting to the *existing* paradigm makes things uniform.
As Fields constantly points out, "When in Rome...".

For a start, most newbies to USENET top post.

....and you think that appearing to be a neophite is a GOOD thing?

Why make it "difficult" for them

Your thinking is inverted.

Old masters do not unnecessarily change a method
which has worked well for years.
It is the **apprentice** who must be expected to adapt.

and require it to be the wrong way round?

You're standing on your head again.

And most people snip the post
to contain only the last question and answer anyway,

That's right.

and it takes less time and effort to read the top of the post
to get the latest answer.

The paradigm is simple:

If it's not important enough to be ABOVE your addition,
SNIP IT OUT.
Most blockquotes are unnecessarily verbose.
The concept is simple: CONTEXT;.
If you're **not replying DIRECTLY to it** WHY INCLUDE IT?

 

[CoyoteBoy]

The paradigm is simple:
If it's not important enough to be ABOVE your addition,
SNIP IT OUT.
Most blockquotes are unnecessarily verbose.
The concept is simple: CONTEXT;.
If you're **not replying DIRECTLY to it** WHY INCLUDE IT?

But in the same vein - if you're snipping out all but the thing you
are directly replying to, (likely to be a single line or paragraph as
above) why bother whether its at the top or the bottom? There are
times when old methods need revising. You wouldnt find people using
hand signals instead of indicating with flashing lights, as the newly
adopted way makes sense and matches other flashy light items in
society, making it more intuitive.

As I say I'm not against bottom posting, I do it and have no problems
with it. Im just open-minded and like to consider both sides, instead
of just adopting what "the old masters" claim is the "right way".
Without questioning, society would stagnate - this is true in many
areas.

 

[John Fields]

On 31 May 2007 06:59:05 -0700, CoyoteBoy <james.buckle@gmail.com>
wrote:

The paradigm is simple:
If it's not important enough to be ABOVE your addition,
SNIP IT OUT.
Most blockquotes are unnecessarily verbose.
The concept is simple: CONTEXT;.
If you're **not replying DIRECTLY to it** WHY INCLUDE IT?

But in the same vein - if you're snipping out all but the thing you
are directly replying to, (likely to be a single line or paragraph as
above) why bother whether its at the top or the bottom? There are
times when old methods need revising. You wouldnt find people using
hand signals instead of indicating with flashing lights, as the newly
adopted way makes sense and matches other flashy light items in
society, making it more intuitive.

As I say I'm not against bottom posting, I do it and have no problems
with it. Im just open-minded and like to consider both sides, instead
of just adopting what "the old masters" claim is the "right way".
Without questioning, society would stagnate - this is true in many
areas.

---
Ignoring your politics, it's customary in Western society for a
document rendered in print to have the text start at the upper left
hand corner of the page, proceed horizontally across the page until
there's no room left to write, and then to drop down to the next
line and continue across the page horizontally from the left margin.

This imbues the text with a feeling of chronological order in that
the top of the page represents an earlier time than text further
down the page.

In a medium such as a newsgroup, where many people participate in a
thread simultaneously, but not necessarily in synchrony, the
temporal order of the discussion is important since it becomes very
inconvenient to read what someone wrote at the top and then to have
to go hunting for what they were responding to by going to the
bottom of the post and then having to ratchet back through the
thread to put the whole thing in perspective.

It's especially inconvenient, and confusing, for someone just
starting to read the thread. Like having to read a book backwards,
a paragraph at a time, from the end to the beginning.


--
JF

 

[CoyoteBoy]

It's especially inconvenient, and confusing, for someone just
starting to read the thread. Like having to read a book backwards,
a paragraph at a time, from the end to the beginning.

--
JF

I have no problems reading either way and find both equally convenient
in different ways. Its rare that anyone reads a thread starting at the
last posting, usually they find the first post and read through it,
then click on the next etc. In this case it makes it a pointless waste
of time to have to scroll through the previous points on every post.
If you insist on jumping into a threaded post system at the end of the
thread instead of the beginning then you should expect to put in some
work to find out the previous particulars. IMO reading from the top
down and from the bottom up can equally be suitable for expressing
chronological order - my mind has no trouble switching from one post
to the next. Within one thread is another matter We could sit and
argue all day about which is more sense, both have merits and
downfalls, but bottom posting has the stubborn advantage of being the
first.