Author Topic: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)  (Read 4835 times)

covkid

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« on: August 28, 2011, 09:33:39 PM »
Hi All,

I'm currently using Eragy to replace Google Power Meeter (RIP) of which I'm happy with their service especially the integration with PG&E tariffs. However just recently I've noticed that Ted fails to generate data to Eragy and Eragy also reports Ted is offline. In looking at the stats page when this happens the result is 1000 for the 3rd party posting. Can some one let me know what this result means? I'm not aware of a HTTP status code of 1000 so sounds like some form of custom http result code.

As an observation it would seem that a power cycle or a restart fixes the issue, so wondering if the HTTP post is using a persistent HTTP connection and if so could it be that Ted fails to recover from some form of network blip or service interruption on Eragy and hence fails to send any more data

Thanks

Wayne

DougHo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2011, 11:36:57 PM »
FWIW, I noticed very similar thing Sunday (lack of posting to EnerSave with result 1000, solved by Restart TED).  I am taking the opportunity to try another third-party (PlotWatt).  It will be interesting to see if they ever end up with the 1000 status.  I also had to turn around my CTs so that the red dot faces away from power source (seemingly opposite from TED's recommendation) to avoid negative numbers in PlotWatt (or Eragy) with my single MTU in default Load (Grid).

GAR

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2011, 07:32:40 AM »
110830-2319 EDT

DougHo:

I have not been able to run any experiment to show that TED, either 1000 or 5000, produces a different output, meaning sign change, when a paired reversal of the current sensors occurs. Thus, if you are looking at the output of the one MTU that had the current sensors reversed as a pair and and both dots were in the same direction, then I do not believe there is any way for PlottWatt to know the difference.

 

DougHo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2011, 09:05:51 AM »
There is definately a difference in third-party posting if you reverse the direction of paired CT red dots (I did it today).  We don't normally see it locally because TED default setting of "load" causes display of absolute values.  The third party posting is a timestamp and "watts" which is a cumulative value supposedly for life of MTU.

TED: If there is a relationship between stats.htm display "Last Value" and posting cumulative watts, can you explain it?  I'm trying to understand why Eragy and PlotWatt displayed negative numbers for me when I had CT red dots toward source of power per your recommendation.  stats.htm has my Last Value around 257028682644 and increased by 15648 during a typical minute (with red dots now facing AWAY from source of power).  In google powermeter's raw data download, my values seemed to reset to zero around T040000Z each day from Oct2009 through mid-Dec 2010, then they jumped higher and kept increasing (no daily reset) through the first couple weeks of June's Beta firmware, then late-June they jumped to a negative number and increased (toward zero, until I updated the Beta which dropped google powermeter).
« Last Edit: August 31, 2011, 09:16:07 AM by DougHo »

DougHo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2011, 09:29:33 AM »
covkid: TED defined 1000 to mean "Socket error connecting to the server"

GAR

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2011, 02:59:27 PM »
110831-0657 EDT

DougHo:

What is a definition of "cumulative watts"? It makes no logical sense. Watts is an instantaneous measurement.

.

DougHo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2011, 03:59:57 PM »
GAR: it is watt-hours.  Except for not understanding why I have to point my red dots AWAY from the power source, I think in my case (of one minute timestamp), I multiply the value (15648) by 60 minutes and the result of 938880 means that my average use during that minute was 93.888 watts.  I will now stop adding to this thread since I took it off topic (you should be able to find info over in the developer API).

covkid

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2011, 10:56:52 PM »
Doug,

Thanks for the tip on the socket error. So seems that if a restart works the Ted's socket handling on error conditions for 3rd party posting is not that good. It should do something like encounter a send error and then back off the retries. I'm suspecting that it probably got the issue due to Eragy. Which over the weekend appeared to be up and down like anything.

With regards to switching around the CT's I have not had to do anything like that. Eragy appears to report my data fine, when it gets it that is ;-)

Wayne

GAR

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2011, 11:14:56 PM »
110831-1507 EDT

DougHo:

It is incorrect to define watts as watt-hours. These are different animals. There needs to be a time base associated with watts in order to arrive at a watt-hour value.

I can measure average watts over 3.624 second periods, add these up to get a cumulative watt value, but without knowledge of that time base for averaging I can not determine kWh.

.

DougHo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2011, 01:50:45 AM »
GAR: Please let us stop adding to this thread (which was about socket error).  Please excuse and don't trust my paraphrasing of TED 5000 Third Party Posting API; read it yourself.  To me the labels saying cumulative "timestamp" and "watts" don't matter much, since the documentation is clear enough that the values represent seconds and watt-hours (they could just as easily have been labeled "t" and "w" or "a" and "b" - whatever).  The posting API seems to allow 1 to 15 minute periods (not anything like 3.624 second periods).  My causes for confusion are the direction my CT red dots have to face to achieve increasing values, and that attempts to understand the "Last Value" in my stats.htm needed an implied decimal point four digits from the right (presumably related to High Precision mode).
« Last Edit: September 01, 2011, 02:02:09 AM by DougHo »

eagleye

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2011, 04:31:51 AM »
I have the same problem as DougHo. 

When I connected with myeragy, my values were negative. as if the CT's were reversed, as myeragy suggested.  I do remember that when I first Installed the CT's I had problems with the connection.  The manual and photos say to point the red dots at the panel, direction of current.  But I had problems on initial installation.  I talked to TED about this and when I reversed the CT's, red dot pointed at the meter,  all worked fine in the calculations.  When I asked the TED tech support, they said it was ok and the values were absolute.  I only had one MTU, no generation so it wasn't a concern to TED support at the time.    I never had a  problem with any numbers until myeragy said my values were backwards.  So, I reversed the CT's now like the diagram in the setup and now My monthly numbers are decreasing. As Ted gateway  thinks the energy is going backwards.  So, now to accelerate the process, I reset the totals to Zero, losing this months cumulative data.  Now the gateway is accumulating in the correct consumption direction.

It may have been that when I received this gateway a year ago there was a bug, now fixed, that cause me to have problems with the direction I had the CT's pointed in.  At the time, TED knew that since cumulative values were absolute, it wouldn't matter which way the dots pointed to make the gateway calculate properly.  So, now looking at my data it is all correct.

The CT issue and red dot direction will become extremely important for people with netmetering and consumption and generation.  This data is critical in understanding what can go wrong with the CT pointed in the wrong direction and amazement as the calculation don't add up because one CT was pointed in the wrong direction.  Before I reset my gateway values to zero, I watched my numbers falling on daily consumption as the CT's were performing and TED was calculating generation instead of consumption.  Or, one thing TED gateway needs is an indicator somewhere to indicate if the Watt value measure is overall consumption or generation for the MTU just a plus or minus, maybe a figure in the stats.htm page since this information might rarely be used.

I am in this group because I was confused about this issue with Eragy and the negative numbers.  This is the solution that the dots should point in the direction of current travel for consumption, just like the TED install diagram.

That means that Eragy data is exact, and I chose this service over all others I tried because they were the easiest one to use and change.  People power has no online support.  If you disconnect, from peoplepower, you can't reconnect your ted.  THey have no links on the site to change or modify the TED units connected or pull up the data for reconnecting TED to the people power site and system.  Peoplepower has no links to disable or disconnect your e-mail if you want to.  Enersave didn't provide me the data I needed quick enough and had a more difficult web page than the ease of myeragy.

The reason I liked google was I enjoyed seeing my house usage when I loaded my google homepage.  That was a HUGE benefit.  I miss that completely.

Per the Watts conversation, we are dealing with WATTS/Seconds.  All calculations are cumulative and the system measures watts consumed over a period of time.  The electric company calculate KWH(Kilowatt/Hour)   as in how many kilowatts you consume per hour.  If you turn the heater on and it pulls 10KW for 1 minute, the actual consumption is 10KW for 1/60 of one hour.  When we look at ted we see the instantaneous values.  at that moment as measured and calculated so if that number stayed consistent for 1 hour, that would be the number consumed in 1 hour.  If a 100 Watt light bulb with a power factor of 1 is left on for 1 hour, it has consumed 100 watts in 1 hour.  0.1 KWH.

the MTU takes the voltage and current measurements to produce a power figure in watts that is averaged over an interval.  The interval gives you an instantanious reading like a volt meter.  Then The gateway through simple math calculates the power consumed per average second of reporting.  This number is cumulative over time.  WE will see this second number as the instantanious reading for that second or minute of time.  But, the Gateway will scale that reading by the proper interval sampling percentage per hour and cumulatively add it every second.

In general conversations like this we need to allow generalization and not be so specific.  I understood what DougHo was aiming at with the description.

This was an important topic on the CT's as I just ran into this problem like him and am here to fix and understand what is going on, which I now do.


drpulis

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: 3rd Party Posting Result of 1000 (Eragy)
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2011, 01:26:08 AM »
There is definately a difference in third-party posting if you reverse the direction of paired CT red dots (I did it today).  We don't normally see it locally because TED default setting of "load" causes display of absolute values.  The third party posting is a timestamp and "watts" which is a cumulative value supposedly for life of MTU.

TED: If there is a relationship between stats.htm display "Last Value" and posting cumulative watts, can you explain it?  I'm trying to understand why Eragy and PlotWatt displayed negative numbers for me when I had CT red dots toward source of power per your recommendation.  stats.htm has my Last Value around 257028682644 and increased by 15648 during a typical minute (with red dots now facing AWAY from source of power).  In google powermeter's raw data download, my values seemed to reset to zero around T040000Z each day from Oct2009 through mid-Dec 2010, then they jumped higher and kept increasing (no daily reset) through the first couple weeks of June's Beta firmware, then late-June they jumped to a negative number and increased (toward zero, until I updated the Beta which dropped google powermeter).

My MTU is connected via standard Red,Black, White.  I just swapped places with Red and Black, and able to keep the red dots facing as recommended.  I had described incident with my ERAGY.
Started Installation/upgrade to TED Pro Home:  Nov 2014
 
  MTU1, NET, with 2 Spyders, Entire Main Panel
  MTU2, Generation
  MTU3, with 2 Spyders, Entire Sub Panel in Main House
  MTU4, 1 Spyder, Separate Cottage and Home Office