I’ve been installing over a dozen of the mmWave blue series switches and have had success with them mostly, but find that the sensing is inconsistent. I have an example here where two of the same switch are in a 2-gang box. They were installed at the same time and they ‘point’ at the same hallway wall. The have the same settings.
Right now the house is empty and you can see that one switch has a single false reading, and one has false readings several times an hour.
How do I get these two devices to behave more similarly?
I’m also curious. I have similar experiences in my house. Some of them I’ve just given up and turned off presence sensing as a result. I’ll eventually get around to getting the working presence sensor to control both lights instead.
I installed VZM32-SN yesterday and also too much false presence detection even on low sensitivity. How to fix it or VZM32-SN just an expensive useless toy?
I wonder if this is an interference case that @EricM_Inovelli has tested? I know he (and I) have tested up to 3 pointing at each other from different parts of the room with no issues. I personally haven’t checked 2 in the same gang box.
If you air gap the one that is working and then reboot the one that is not working, does it behave more like the other one?
You were absolutely right. Pulling the air gap on the ‘working’ switch resulted in the other switch reporting significantly less false positives. I also have a 3 gang box with the same problem.
Since you’re using Z2M and we have multi area support there (up to 4), my suggestion would be to stick with one switch with mmwave in the same box and create a hub automation driven by a different area if necessary that turns on the other light.
I appreciate the suggestion but I don’t want to rely on my HA server to be up to have the lights operate. One switch controls a hallway and the other works in tandem with another switch for a stairwell.
Im having the same problem. I have 3 mmwave switches in a 3 gang box, connected 3 different sets of lights. Is there a way to completely disable the mmwave module from emitting radio waves?
Also weirdly enough the middle one has the most false positives, and the other 2 are pretty ok.
I don’t think this was a use case that anyone tested during beta since most people only had one switch (besides Inovelli) and I don’t think anyone expected people to put multiple mmWave switches in the same gang box.
If you’re wanting all ganged switches to always turn on together with the same detection area, you could use Inovelli dimmers for the additional, and bind the mmWave switch to the others. Save a chunk of change, too. For different detection areas, I don’t know what could be done besides doing the same thing — single mmWave switch — but instead of binding, configurable multiple detection areas on that single switch and use automations based on those areas to trigger the other switches. Hub dependent at that point.
To just have it work as the OP expects, maybe the adjacent mmWave modules could be configured to have synced clocks and staggered emission times, but I think that’s an extremely long shot for many reasons - is that even possible radio and detection wise? Would HLK (the mmWave module manufacturer) be willing to implement it? Would Inovelli be willing to use that functionality if it’s available? Would it even be possible to sync clocks precisely enough between two switches with only Zigbee communication? These are 60GHz mmWave modules, so timing would have to be extremely precise.
