spurious KNX packets from Comfort

[ident]

Thanks but You sent a KNX Monitor log

[ident]

I was mistaken, you did send the correct Bus Monitor Log. I clicked on the wrong file and opened the KNX screenshot instead!

We are looking aty the bus moniror now

[ident]

We have traced the cause of the problem. It was due to a combination of Comfigurator and UCM/KNX bugs

There was a bug in Comfigurator where the Drive Control telegram Type mapped to Counter was not written correctly to EEPROM. If you Read from EEPROM, you will find that the Drive Control telegram mappings become Blank. Normally you cannot assign Blank Counter or Sensor to a KNX to Comfort entry
This bug has been fixed in the new Comfigurator 3.5.4 (beta) , see http://www.comfortforums.com/view_topic.php?id=3021&forum_id=20&jump_to=12715#p12715

The assignment of Blank Counter in KNX to Comfort causes a bug to be manifested. It sends a Counter 255 change to Comfort, which MAY trigger a spurious and random Response. This is what happened in your case - it caused the Response which sends 0/3/10 to be sent to KNX.

This can be fixed by upgrading to Comfigurator 3.5.4
Then do a Write to KT03 again which will send the correct Drive Control mapping to UCM/KNX and the UCM/KNX will not exhibit the problem.

Let us know if that works.

This may also have an effect on your other temperature problem in the same file, although we have not tested that yet

Thanks for your feedback and information

[ident]

Of course the UCM/KNX bug will be fixed in the next firmware release but without the Comfigurator bug, it should not cause any problems

[ekarak]

Confirmed by testing, the drive control does not produce the bogus packets anymore.

All KNX floating-point values still get overwritten though.

[ident]

We have confirmed there is another mesage sent for floating point packets assigned to sensor. This will be fixed in the next version of KNX which we are working on

[ident]

The new Firmware UCM/KNX 6.024 has fixed the 2 issues reported
See http://www.comfortforums.com/view_topic.php?id=3058&forum_id=89
Thanks for the feedback