-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Battery alarm not updating if battery is empty #36
Comments
@dave-code-ruiz I have the same issue. Hope this can be fixed! TIA |
I test all you say , and it is correct I dont know why , for values technical_alarm, tamper_indication, rf_alarm and battery_alarm need 662 property instead of 85 Im trying to solves it |
yes! working! thanx for the quick fix! |
Great! , please dont close issue because i want to develop new state sensor or binary sensor with state alarm can get states "battery alarm, technical_alarm, tamper_indication, rf_alarm, remote_access_alarm or device_lost_alarm |
Works! Great! Thank you very much! |
Hi,
today i discovered that 2 of my thermostats have low battery's but in homeassistant the battery_alarm attribute stay's 0
also checked where the fault is (i think) after some reverse engineering of the uponor api found;
That the formula for battery alarm is
"101 + (500 * "controller") + (40 * "thermostat")
which is correct (if im reading correct your using an offset of 80 + address 21 = 101) in the custom_components/uhomeuponor/uponor_api/const.pyi think the script is trying to read property 85 of the address defined by the formula above. but it needs to read property 662.
i have no python skills to make a pull request to you git... i've checked it via a shell script, with the following line:
battery=$(curl -s "http://$uhomeip/api" --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "2.0", "id": 8, "method": "read", "params": {"objects": [{"id": "'$battery'", "properties": {"662": {}}}]}}' | jq -r '.result.objects[0].properties["662"].value')
which gave me the battery warning on the empty thermostats.
is it possible without to many hassle to add this in the code?
thanx!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: