Skip to content
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

Add support for TFA Dostmann 14.1504 Radio-controlled grill and meat thermometer (#2288) #2296

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 22, 2023

Conversation

joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

That checksum looks accidental. A wide enough CRC can always be produced for just a few bits.
Are you sure it's a CRC? Maybe it's a digest (LFSR)? Can you share the list of captured codes you derived this from?

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

That checksum looks accidental. A wide enough CRC can always be produced for just a few bits. Are you sure it's a CRC? Maybe it's a digest (LFSR)? Can you share the list of captured codes you derived this from?

I know, I can tell you that I tried a few exhaustive searches with the 16-bit LFSR functions from util.c (rtl_433), more precisely the lfsr_digest16() function with all possible combinations for "gen" and "key", and applied that to all possible substrings... with no success there. I was very surprised/frustrated too, but maybe I missed something obvious.

Sure, here are all samples along with the tool to compare the computed CRCs against them. You can simply clone this and run "./build.sh":
https://github.com/joel-bourquard/tfa_tpx305_reveng

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

Did you try our revdgst16? It finds gen 8810 key 93ad final xor d17c when you omit the preamble.
0x8810 is the gen used everywhere, which sounds reassuring, the final xor could mean that we picket up some sync that shouldn't be used -- not sure.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Did you try our revdgst16? It finds gen 8810 key 93ad final xor d17c when you omit the preamble. 0x8810 is the gen used everywhere, which sounds reassuring, the final xor could mean that we picket up some sync that shouldn't be used -- not sure.

Aah awesome, thanks a lot! No I didn't know that tool, works great indeed. The reason my prior brute force attempts didn't work out, was that final XOR.

I've tried a few things but no zero final XOR so far - - so I've updated my PR with the LSFR and the values that you mentioned - which I think are the most suitable so far.

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

If possible I wouldn't use the full preamble but just a tail portion. This will improve reception if the signal isn't immediatly demodulated perfectly, how typical receivers work to "tune-in". That scheme needs a "sync" at the end to known when data starts, could be a single bit, but is usually aligned. So if 5c is hard coded to be matched anyway then you can use a robust preamble of e.g. aaaa5c.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

If possible I wouldn't use the full preamble but just a tail portion. This will improve reception if the signal isn't immediatly demodulated perfectly, how typical receivers work to "tune-in". That scheme needs a "sync" at the end to known when data starts, could be a single bit, but is usually aligned. So if 5c is hard coded to be matched anyway then you can use a robust preamble of e.g. aaaa5c.

Good point thanks, I will do that!

Question about the Probe status: currently I set it to "Connected" / "Disconnected", is this good? Or should I use a different upper/lowercase convention, or an int (0/1) for that?

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

Question about the Probe status: currently I set it to "Connected" / "Disconnected", is this good? Or should I use a different upper/lowercase convention, or an int (0/1) for that?

I would use a 0/1 int for easier transfer into databases (int supports aggregation), like the common battery_ok, so probe_ok. Or perhaps even invert the output and name it probe_fail? We don't have a common scheme for these "event like" data keys.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Question about the Probe status: currently I set it to "Connected" / "Disconnected", is this good? Or should I use a different upper/lowercase convention, or an int (0/1) for that?

I would use a 0/1 int for easier transfer into databases (int supports aggregation), like the common battery_ok, so probe_ok. Or perhaps even invert the output and name it probe_fail? We don't have a common scheme for these "event like" data keys.

Good point! I think probe_fail is the best option, and pushed the change now!
(user-friendly text is "Probe failed").

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

joel-bourquard commented Jan 3, 2023

Battery flag implemented yesterday evening and works well. No more changes planned, so if you can consider it for inclusion, it would be great 😉
If any other changes are advised or if I should squash, please let me know...

Edit: Renamed to TFA-14.1504.V2 to perfectly match the manufacturer's model number, and because the older 14.1504 had a completely different protocol.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @zuckschwerdt,
I've been run-testing the decoder for a few days now, under challenging SNR conditions, and it's working great so far. No other changes planned for me at this point.

What do you think about merging my PR?

I'm also looking forward to getting feedback from other owners of this device, to validate whether all LSFR params are identical or not. If they are not, then I have some ideas on how to address it.

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

Yes, looks good. The "mic" should be "CRC" as it's the same strength.
And "model" should be simpler, e.g. "TFA-141504v2" (only one dash in the middle, no other special chars).

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

joel-bourquard commented Jan 8, 2023

Yes, looks good. The "mic" should be "CRC" as it's the same strength. And "model" should be simpler, e.g. "TFA-141504v2" (only one dash in the middle, no other special chars).
Hi @zuckschwerdt,
Great, thanks! I've implemented the exact changes that you suggested and squashed my commits. Ready to merge for me 😉

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @zuckschwerdt ,
Great, thanks! I've implemented the exact changes that you suggested and squashed my commits. Ready to merge for me 😉

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @zuckschwerdt,
Do you know when my PR can be merged? Or should I ping someone?
Thanks 😉

@merbanan
Copy link
Owner

LGTM, but I think we we need docs and config changes also. And then some sample signals.

@merbanan
Copy link
Owner

@joel-bourquard
Did you upload any signal samples to the test repo ? I can not see any pull request.

https://github.com/merbanan/rtl_433_tests/pulls

@merbanan
Copy link
Owner

In this commit you can see the needed config and documentation changes.

cd90897

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

Indeed. Run ./maintainer_update.py to refresh docs and the add that commit.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

In this commit you can see the needed config and documentation changes.

cd90897

Should be all done, thanks! => d145440

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

@joel-bourquard Did you upload any signal samples to the test repo ? I can not see any pull request.

https://github.com/merbanan/rtl_433_tests/pulls

@merbanan not yet, but I will definitely do it! I'll fork that repo and do a PR.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @zuckschwerdt , @merbanan ,
All ready on the rtl_433 side, I think :-)

So I have created a PR with documentation+samples on the rtl_433_tests side:
merbanan/rtl_433_tests#445

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased on latest master.

@joel-bourquard
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @zuckschwerdt ,
Rebased on latest master. Would it be possible for you to merge it please? :)

@zuckschwerdt
Copy link
Collaborator

Just a few other (~3) merges first.

@zuckschwerdt zuckschwerdt merged commit 5f95b42 into merbanan:master Jan 22, 2023
@joel-bourquard joel-bourquard deleted the tfa-14-1504 branch January 22, 2023 18:36
obones pushed a commit to obones/rtl_433 that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2023
…thermometer (merbanan#2296)


Co-authored-by: root@rpi <rpi@host.matrixrewriter.com>
andrewjw pushed a commit to andrewjw/rtl_433 that referenced this pull request Sep 29, 2023
…thermometer (merbanan#2296)


Co-authored-by: root@rpi <rpi@host.matrixrewriter.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants