DT92 Won't Bind with EvoHome WiFi

[sidepipe]

I've been adding DT92's to my EvoHome zones because they're more convenient and accurate. Binding them though has been hit and miss at best.

I've got one that just refuses to bind properly. It works as the temperature sensor for a zone, but the set point can't be adjusted nor does it show. When binding, the EvoHome WiFi says "success," but the thermostat doesn't come out of binding mode and doesn't say 54nc. The others took a couple of tries, but I've tried with this one probably 20 times... Tried deleting the zone etc. but nothing seems to work.

Any ideas?

[top brake]

have you followed the binding instructions in the evohome installation guide completely?

[sidepipe]

I'll try not to be sarcastic and just say yes. I've also tried every variation of it that I can think of, including removing the zone and adding the DT92 first. I have two other DT92's that worked fine after a couple of tries, but this one just refuses. As I say, it is recognised as a temperature sensing device - I know this because the temperature matches between the controller and the stat.

The DT92 isn't new, it's second hand. Is it possible that older DT92's had a different software version that doesn't work with EvoHome?

[top brake]

I'll try not to be sarcastic and just say yes. I've also tried every variation of it that I can think of, including removing the zone and adding the DT92 first. I have two other DT92's that worked fine after a couple of tries, but this one just refuses. As I say, it is recognised as a temperature sensing device - I know this because the temperature matches between the controller and the stat.

The DT92 isn't new, it's second hand. Is it possible that older DT92's had a different software version that doesn't work with EvoHome?

how old? datecode please

if the others pair ok it would suggest a device issue?

p.s. no need to feel or express sarcasm I am simply trying to get to the bottom of your issue

[sidepipe]

how old? datecode please

Not sure which is the date code... there's a label that says:

DTS92E1020
1345 5 ST2

if the others pair ok it would suggest a device issue?

Yes, except that the others also took a couple of tries, and this one clearly works from a hardware point of view.... though I guess what I don't know is that it can receive the radio signal from the EvoHome - I know it transmits, but I guess if it can't receive for some reason then maybe the symptoms I see would be explained.

p.s. no need to feel or express sarcasm I am simply trying to get to the bottom of your issue

I know, which is why I was very restrained . Ultimately you don't know me, and people are stupid enough not to follow instructions, so from your point of view I can sort of understand the question. However, I'd have to be REALLY stupid to have got 2 to bind, tried ( at least ) 20 times with this one, and at no point followed the ( quite simple ) binding procedure to the letter For the record, I'm a qualified electronic engineer, B.Eng with first class honours, so you probably should assume that I've tried the basics

[top brake]

Not sure which is the date code... there's a label that says:

DTS92E1020
1345 5 ST2



Yes, except that the others also took a couple of tries, and this one clearly works from a hardware point of view.... though I guess what I don't know is that it can receive the radio signal from the EvoHome - I know it transmits, but I guess if it can't receive for some reason then maybe the symptoms I see would be explained.



I know, which is why I was very restrained . Ultimately you don't know me, and people are stupid enough not to follow instructions, so from your point of view I can sort of understand the question. However, I'd have to be REALLY stupid to have got 2 to bind, tried ( at least ) 20 times with this one, and at no point followed the ( quite simple ) binding procedure to the letter For the record, I'm a qualified electronic engineer, B.Eng with first class honours, so you probably should assume that I've tried the basics

device datecode should not be a problem, I would try fresh batteries and ensure its a metre away from the evo when binding, it is not getting the return bind signal (its a 2 way RF)


I have learned never assume hence why I always state the obvious

its not a case of aptitude or capability, its a case of taking an exact step by step approach to successfully bind the devices :-)

[sidepipe]

Must admit I haven't tried moving it further away from the controller when binding since the instructions say to have it close. I'll give that a go later in the week when I get a chance.

The batteries are fully charged low self discharge Ni-Mh, which will only be 1.2v but then that's better than alkaline batteries for more than half their lifespan. I'll also try some fresh alkalines just in case but it'd be a pretty weird design where the transmitter works but not the receiver because of battery voltage.

[top brake]

Product is specified for AA 1.5v Alkaline so the rechargeables may well give problems. Yes at least 1 meter apart please. Where in instructions does it say 'bring close'?

[top brake]

image.jpg

Here are the binding instruction in the evohome installation guide

[sidepipe]

Product is specified for AA 1.5v Alkaline so the rechargeables may well give problems.

Unless it's very badly designed, Ni-Mh cells shouldn't cause any issues other than potentially the battery % monitoring won't work correctly. The Alkaline battery will hit 1.2V WELL before it's useful life is over - so if there are problems with rechargables then it would mean that you're only using, say, 70% of alkalines also, which would be a bit wasteful. Also, ultimately the transmitter will take more juice than the receiver, so I'd expect to see problems in that direction first. Still, like I say, I'll try alkalines just in case it really is that badly designed .

Yes at least 1 meter apart please. Where in instructions does it say 'bring close'?

Well, my interpretation of the diagram in section 6 (?) of the DT92 install guide was that it should be "about a meter away," not "at least a meter away." I assumed that the binding mode either used a lower power ( a la Z Wave ) or else the distance was specified that way to make sure that there wasn't interference from other transmitters on the same frequency or in the same system. I didn't think that it was saying "don't have them too close because the receiver will be saturated".... if that's what it's really saying then it's ambiguous at best. Plus, all of the various "binding the dt92" videos that I watched ( in desperation ) show the DT92 and the ( normally BDR91 ) right next to each other.