I know I am beating a dead horse here… but I absolutely, wholeheartedly believe you need to drop the 2-1 (on/off) marketing and name from the switch.
When people are deciding between an on/off switch and a dimmer… they are generally choosing the on/off for loads that dimmers are incapable of supporting. The differentiating feature is that when they are on they are fully connecting the load and giving it the full amps of the circuit.
I understand that was the intent and ask of the manufacturer, which is where the name came from. That wasn’t what was delivered, so drop the name.
The relay in an on/off should fully connect line to load. In the blue, the relay fully DISconnects the load or routes it through the dimmer. There is no added functionality of the switch by doing this, so why should it receive extra marketing and naming that just leads to confusion. Call it what it is: a dimmer.
EVERY smart dimmer I have worked with has the option of zero-ramp rate for on and a default level of 100%. How is that really any different than what the Blue switch is doing?
What happens if you want to make an on/off in the future and do it right with a 15A relay? How are you going to explain away the differences between it and the current 2-1? Save the 2-1 name for a future product that actually does what the original intent was to do. Continuing down this path is just creating unnecessary confusion for everyone.
To simplify the marketing/disclaimer:
For dimmable lighting loads up XXX watts, not to be used for____ (The same type of language every other manufacturer has on their dimmers and is expected by consumers.)
On/Off mode: Simulates an on/off switch with instant on/off and dimming options disabled.
Really, the most reliable way to prevent this would be to remove the “2-in-1” designation. “On/off or dimmer” implies very strongly that on/off mode will work with non-dimmable devices.
Understood. Thanks for the continued concern. I’ve beaten the horse myself numerous times myself and hold the position that the definition of on/off refers to lighting.
There are also lights out there that are non-dimmable. Are we supposed to put a disclaimer up on the dimmer page that it’s ok to buy this because it can be converted to a simulated on/off switch? I feel that’s more confusing to people.
The argument goes both ways, and at the end of the day, I felt personally that if we put the disclaimer up that says this is a switch that is meant for lighting and lighting only, then it should be a given that it’s not to be used for anything else.
If we come out with a dedicated on/off switch for appliances, outlets, etc, we can cross that bridge when the time comes.
Remember when I said that using the switch with a magnetic ballast causes the switch to heat up? I meant REALLY heat up. To the point that it can soften/deform the switch cover (and feels hot to the touch).
Inovelli has always warned against using the Blue switches with inductive loads. A magnetic ballast is a coiled wire setup similar to a transformer - its entire function is based on induction. The heating your switch experienced is a huge concern - the risk of fire is clear, and I hope your posts provide a cautionary tale that will dissuade anyone else from using inductive loads with their Blues.
Yep, a great example of what can happen when you use a device for some purpose other than that for which the UL certified it. There is a reason that the 2-1 was not certified for inductive loads.
Most people (myself included) don’t know that a magnetic ballast, which is still reasonably common for florescent lights, IS an inductive load. Far as I knew, I was just powering a light (no motors, etc).
Fair point - perhaps the warning could be made more explicit by listing the most common types of incompatible loads, along with some text that says “if you don’t know how to identify your load, consult a professional.” DIY is great and I encourage everyone to take on home projects if they have the aptitude, but these activities should never be performed without complete information. On the flip side, it’s not all on Inovelli to provide said info. If the warning says “do not use with an inductive load” and you don’t know what that means, STOP and find out before continuing. Preventable accidents are the worst kind.
I feel like we’ve descended far into bikeshed territory right now. Everyone seems to understand the issue, and I imagine Eric’s got the feedback he needs from the community in order to wordsmith the product page on this issue until the end of time.
Is anyone experiencing strange behaviour with the double tap to maximum dim settings with 2.14? Please feel free to move this to a new thread if necessary.
I have double tap up to max enabled, set to 99/100. However on multiple switches double tapping up results in less than 100%. Specially it seems to go to 39% each time. Any ideas? Does this have something to do with setting the minimum and maximum boundaries? Parameters below for reference. Thanks in advance.
Can confirm I have done this a bunch of times. Factory reset followed by restoring settings still results in going to 39%. I can set up a routine to overide and go to 100%, but that would require the hub when presumably using parameter 55 means the command is executed locally on the switch vs triggered by the hub… I think? Also I can confirm that double tap up function did work on 2.08 and double tap down function works as intended on 2.14.
So my double tap up does go to ~40%. I can push and hold up paddle to finish getting it to 100%. I use double tap down for a scene so don’t know about double down. I believe @mamber is working at designed.
This is a scaling error in the driver. 99/255 = 39%
Make sure you are running the latest driver. I fixed it in the Hubitat driver a couple weeks ago (2023-04-11 driver date). I don’t know the status of other hub platforms (SmartThings, HomeAssistant, etc.)
Interesting. Good catch. For smartthings, I am on the latest driver and don’t see reference to a scaling fix in the update log. I’m assuming that means I should let @EricM_Inovelli know that there might be some sort of a scaling issue in the driver? For Smartthings as far as I know, Inovelli has to update the driver and push it out.
