EventRunner 5

[Neo Andersson 230]

@jgab

Jan i have another issue..This line used to work on my all installations

 

Please login or register to see this code.

Please login or register to see this attachment.

 

 

@jgab

Jan i figured out that variable office_controller_lastPressed can not be accessed inside the rule..that's why it doesn;t work, but this was working so far

Edited November 29, 2023 by Neo Andersson

[Sjakie 156]

Jan whats wrong? Test 5 result is gordijn_toestemming=false but triggers are true

I checked there are no other rulesor checks  with gordijntoestemming=false

I opend and closed window/ door to update again their status

Please login or register to see this code.

Please login or register to see this code.

 

[jgab 2,641]

15 hours ago, Neo Andersson said:

@jgab

Jan i have another issue..This line used to work on my all installations

 

Please login or register to see this code.

Please login or register to see this attachment.

 

 

@jgab

Jan i figured out that variable office_controller_lastPressed can not be accessed inside the rule..that's why it doesn;t work, but this was working so far

So, where do you update office_controller_lastPressed ? When the rule tries to do the subtraction it says that the value of office_controller_lastPressed is a boolean.

So have a ook in other places you assign something to office_contrioller_lastPressed.

If I add this it works for me

Please login or register to see this code.

office_controller_lastPressed = os.time()

[ChristianSogaard 71]

Im trying to create a Rule that triggers when a count of minimum 4 breached from a PIR sensor within max two minutes.

To "measure"  that someone is staying at a room, and not just passing.

 

Something like this 

rule("236:Breached & BreachedCounter >= 4 & @Now < (2 minutes since first breached of the last 4 breached) => Heater:on ; Reset BreachedCounter

rule("236:Breached => BreachedCounter = BreachedCounter+1

 

Getting the time from the last trigger of these 8 can gathered from the History. But is not trivi to get the oldest timestamp

 => api.get("/events/history?from=@now-120&objectType=device&objectId=236 (Then i need to count events, should be more than 4) actually it need to be 8, because the output is not separating Breached & Safe  
 => api.get("/events/history?objectType=device&objectId=236&numberOfRecords=8 (then i need to check last event is les then 120 sec old.) actually it need to be 8, because the output is not separating Breached & Safe 

Will return eight almost identical data sets, were I need to check the oldest timestamp should not be older than @Now-120

 

What is a good way of creating a Rule that triggers when a count of minimum 4 breached from a PIR sensor within max two minutes. ?

 

Please login or register to see this spoiler.

 

[jgab 2,641]

2 hours ago, Sjakie said:

Jan whats wrong? Test 5 result is gordijn_toestemming=false but triggers are true

I checked there are no other rulesor checks  with gordijntoestemming=false

I opend and closed window/ door to update again their status

Please login or register to see this code.

Please login or register to see this code.

 

So, if you run rule("test5=true") to test your check, it doesn't mean that the first  rule run and set gordijn_toestemming=true.

Change the last rule to 

Please login or register to see this code.

to verify.

 

I would suggest you add a .start() to the first two rules so they always run and update gordijn_toestemming to the correct value.

16 hours ago, Neo Andersson said:

@jgab

Jan i have another issue..This line used to work on my all installations

 

Please login or register to see this code.

Please login or register to see this attachment.

 

 

@jgab

Jan i figured out that variable office_controller_lastPressed can not be accessed inside the rule..that's why it doesn;t work, but this was working so far

Do you declare it local ?

locally declared lua variables have never been accessible in ER rules.

[jgab 2,641]

17 hours ago, Neo Andersson said:

@jgabJan how can i access a nested table value in a rule?

 

 

1.

Please login or register to see this code.

 

Please login or register to see this attachment.

 

 

2.

 

I cant wrap into one line nested II >> calls

 

Please login or register to see this code.

I have tried several ways..using {} for nested ||>, using ;;...ehhhh

 

 

 

This works now?

[Neo Andersson 230]

25 minutes ago, jgab said:

 

This works now?

Jan, yes this works, but i still dont know how to do nested ||>> statements. I have tried many many combinations

EX how to formulate this

 

Please login or register to see this code.

or should I aviod using ||>> when the code is more complex?

[jgab 2,641]

20 minutes ago, ChristianSogaard said:

Im trying to create a Rule that triggers when a count of minimum 4 breached from a PIR sensor within max two minutes.

To "measure"  that someone is staying at a room, and not just passing.

 

Something like this 

rule("236:Breached & BreachedCounter >= 4 & @Now < (2 minutes since first breached of the last 4 breached) => Heater:on ; Reset BreachedCounter

rule("236:Breached => BreachedCounter = BreachedCounter+1

 

Getting the time from the last trigger of these 8 can gathered from the History. But is not trivi to get the oldest timestamp

 => api.get("/events/history?from=@now-120&objectType=device&objectId=236 (Then i need to count events, should be more than 4) actually it need to be 8, because the output is not separating Breached & Safe  
 => api.get("/events/history?objectType=device&objectId=236&numberOfRecords=8 (then i need to check last event is les then 120 sec old.) actually it need to be 8, because the output is not separating Breached & Safe 

Will return eight almost identical data sets, were I need to check the oldest timestamp should not be older than @Now-120

 

What is a good way of creating a Rule that triggers when a count of minimum 4 breached from a PIR sensor within max two minutes. ?

 

 

You need some "sliding window" to keep the last 4 values. Usually one does that with a table but it's a bit clunky in ER (reminds me I should improve table handling in ER).

Anyway, you can implement that window with 4 variables

 

Here I replace you sensor with a keypress to test (bct1 stands for breached counter time 1...)

Please login or register to see this code.

 

of course, if you looking for 10 presses within x time this becomes clunky...

then you make a queue data type that you can use . here called windows, that has a set size

Please login or register to see this code.

 

[Neo Andersson 230]

1 minute ago, jgab said:

 

You need some "sliding window" to keep the last 4 values. Usually one does that with a table but it's a bit clunky in ER (reminds me I should improve table handling in ER).

Anyway, you can implement that window with 4 variables

 

Here I replace you sensor with a keypress to test (bct1 stands for breached counter time 1...)

Please login or register to see this code.

 

of course, if you looking for 10 presses within x time this becomes clunky...

then you make a queue data type that you can use . here called windows, that has a set size

Please login or register to see this code.

 

I think a way more convinient way is to set this in parameters of PIR sensor. Almost all PIR sensor do have this feature.

 

Please login or register to see this image.

/monthly_2023_11/image.png.fc03b21e0ba4bf32cf2cbb405d61a702.png" />

[ChristianSogaard 71]

16 minutes ago, Neo Andersson said:

I think a way more convinient way is to set this in parameters of PIR sensor. Almost all PIR sensor do have this feature.

 

Please login or register to see this link.

Thank you for sharing - i was looking at this also. But i need the "normal" breached and this extended at the same time.

 

[jgab 2,641]

54 minutes ago, Neo Andersson said:

Jan, yes this works, but i still dont know how to do nested ||>> statements. I have tried many many combinations

EX how to formulate this

 

Please login or register to see this code.

or should I aviod using ||>> when the code is more complex?

Yes,||>> is just a more convenient way to write if-then-elseif.....elseif...else end.

When it becomes nested it doesn't work so well, as there is no way to tell the difference between '||' on top-level and '||' in a subexpression....

if-then-elseif... you can nest to any levels...

But, of course there was a bug in the code which prevented ||>> to be nested in anything else,

...so I pushed v0.52 where you can do either

 

if test1 then

   || test2 >> dosomething2

   || test3 >> dosomething3

   :

end

 

or not so elegant

|| test1 >>

   (

      || test2 >> dosomething2

      || test3 >> dosomething3

   )

   :

 

 

I will try to come up with a proper case expression, something like

rule([[key fob:key =>

       case fob:key of

          '1:pressed' : <statements>

          '1:pressed' : <statements>

          '1:pressed' : <statements>

          default:        <statements>

       end

]])

 

but haven't decided yet for the syntax...

 

 

 

[jgab 2,641]

On 11/29/2023 at 2:56 PM, ChristianSogaard said:

Rules:

Please login or register to see this code.

 

Please login or register to see this code.

 

 

Did you get a solution?

I'm trying my best and I can't reproduce the problem. 

2:tryArm is implemented as a api call  api.post("/alarms/v1/partitions/"..id.."/actions/tryArm") - so it's kind of Fibaro that handles it ....

and shouldn't have any side effect. Unless of course you have some rules that trigger and start to arm the whole house - but it doesn't look like that, looking at your rules...

 

Could you disable your alarm rules and just try

rule("2:tryArm") and see if it still causes the other partitions to arm?

 

Do all your partitions share common devices? That's the only difference I can think of is that I have unique devices in each partition - however it would be interesting of overlapping devices cause this "side-effect"....

 

[ChristianSogaard 71]

45 minutes ago, jgab said:

 

Did you get a solution?

I'm trying my best and I can't reproduce the problem. 

2:tryArm is implemented as a api call  api.post("/alarms/v1/partitions/"..id.."/actions/tryArm") - so it's kind of Fibaro that handles it ....

and shouldn't have any side effect. Unless of course you have some rules that trigger and start to arm the whole house - but it doesn't look like that, looking at your rules...

 

Could you disable your alarm rules and just try

rule("2:tryArm") and see if it still causes the other partitions to arm?

 

Do all your partitions share common devices? That's the only difference I can think of is that I have unique devices in each partition - however it would be interesting of overlapping devices cause this "side-effect"....

 

I re-entered the rule, and now im getting this when triggered

I also deleted all my Alarm rules in EV4 - but i didnt see any overlapping issues

Please login or register to see this attachment.

 

rule([[#Key951_2_Pressed2_4_Pressed2 => 
 || 0:armed >> 0:armed=false;   log('#Disarmed from Matrix as Keypad')
 || !1:armed >> 1:tryArm ; log('#Try to Arm the house from Matrix as Keypad')
]])

 

2 and 1:tryArm is not working (Above error)
0:tryArm is working

Edited December 2, 2023 by ChristianSogaard
Typo

[Sjakie 156]

Perhaps it will help?

I did't use tryArm because it gave some difficulties at the beginning and regret I can't remeber why.

partiton zero I also don't use because it messed in ER4 my alarm up, there I had 4 partitions. Now in Alarm my lowesst ID = 1

I use 2 main arm partitons and 2 for guests

if I activate tryArm partition 1 or partiton 2 in both cases it arm my appartment

if I use common devices it will also both arm the partitions

 

[ChristianSogaard 71]

Update...

I created these rules

Please login or register to see this code.

 

They actually arms the right partitions

but im getting errors when triggered...

[02.12.2023] [09:44:15] [ERROR] [ER2047]: [Rule:4:2]>> [Rule:4:951:key == '2:Pressed' => 2:tryArm] Runtime: ./include/fibLib.lua:191: attempt to get length of a nil value (field 'breachedDevices') prop
951:key == '2:Pressed' => 2:tryArm

 

[jgab 2,641]

3 minutes ago, ChristianSogaard said:

Update...

I created these rules

Please login or register to see this code.

 

They actually arms the right partitions

but im getting errors when triggered...

[02.12.2023] [09:44:15] [ERROR] [ER2047]: [Rule:4:2]>> [Rule:4:951:key == '2:Pressed' => 2:tryArm] Runtime: ./include/fibLib.lua:191: attempt to get length of a nil value (field 'breachedDevices') prop
951:key == '2:Pressed' => 2:tryArm

 

Ok,  good we have an error  will check it later today. ,

[jgab 2,641]

Ok, there was a bug in tryArm if there were no devices breached.

I've pushed v0.54 with a fix.

[ChristianSogaard 71]

45 minutes ago, jgab said:

Ok, there was a bug in tryArm if there were no devices breached.

I've pushed v0.54 with a fix.

Thank You Jan

[Pica2017 2]

Jan - simple one, thought this was working but getting an error.

This is an example from your interval rules post
 

rule("@{10:00,15:00} => log('It is 10:00 or 15:00')")

Last err: [Rule:38:@{10:00,15:00} => log('It is 10:00 or 15:00')] Rule: Invalid daily time: table: 0xaaaae2595b10

[jgab 2,641]

1 hour ago, Pica2017 said:

Jan - simple one, thought this was working but getting an error.

This is an example from your interval rules post
 

rule("@{10:00,15:00} => log('It is 10:00 or 15:00')")

Last err: [Rule:38:@{10:00,15:00} => log('It is 10:00 or 15:00')] Rule: Invalid daily time: table: 0xaaaae2595b10

Sorry, it was a bug that snuck into one of the last versions.

I pushed 0.56 with a fix and added your name to the official bug hunters