Merging multiple controllers schedule

[Demitry]

Don’t hold your breath guys they clearly made this so much more complicated than they had to. Take a look at this 9 year old thread. The argument that few people have more than 16 zones didn’t make any sense then and it makes little sense now. They simply for one reason or another don’t want to do this.

As previously I and others made clear that as user I just want to merge two seperate (Front Yard) and (Back Yard) control sets together (without running wires) that are currently being handled by two dumb controllers that work and have been working since I posted about this 5 years ago. It has nothing to do with having more than 16 zones.

I have 3 zones in the back and 3 in the front so 2 Rachio controllers would be purchased to acomplish this IF ONLY they saw this as a money making opportunity for the company. The fact that these threads have THE MOST VIEWS, had the most views then and now should move the needle at the company but for some odd reason they’ve dug their heels in that this is an “unwanted” feature.

So I wait…check ever so often for when and if they finally add it…because my dumb controllers continue to function just fine. I have no reason to buy a smart controller unless this convenience feature is added since manually scheduling a smart controller is no different than having two dumb units.

9 YEAR OLD Suggestion Still on the table…

URGENT: Need fix to multiple Rachio units so they work as one system

Plus one more who would like to integrate more than 16 zones into one controller. I do not own a second Rachio and I’m not sure I will for my next 8 plus zones.

I love the simple intuitive UI that is miles ahead of competition but this is such a thorn that for me takes away the entire value proposition of ditching my dumb timers…that do work.

[Demitry]

Also it looks like competition in the space has finally arrived that allows for this feature. From what I understand OpenSprinkler allows you to do just what many have been requesting here for nearly 10 years.

[tmcgahey]

OpenSprinkler has some nice features, but IMHO is far from a consumer smart sprinkler controller. Rachio can be tricky enough for some people, now throw in Raspberry Pi, open source coding, etc…it isn’t for a vast majority of people…

[Demitry]

Sheesh. Have you ever pulled appart a Rachio and seen whats actually inside? Or…used the OpenSprinkler to make that comment? Their webUI is no less complicated, well documented, and no less intuitive. ZERO coding is required. You connect the unit, use a phone or web browser to connect it to your wifi (or leave it in self ap mode) network and configure your schedule. How is this any more difficult to Rachio…doesn’t even need an App. They’ve been around since 2015…and all that open source coding has created a viable arguably better alternative. The fact that you can (but are in no way required) to run your own code is an added bonus for those that are capable or want to do so.

When it comes to providing this particular key feature (merging multiple units into one schedule) there is NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE until Rachio does what they say nobody needs. This feature is long overdue and frankly not complicated to implement.

The code is open source all Rachio engineers would have to do is look to learn how to do it. But when faced with this issue the only replies have been that “its too complicated”. It’s not at all complicated as multiple users in these “merging” threads that come up repeatedly have pointed out.

The fact that you can’t merge multiple valve sets into one schedule and have to treat them as separate units it ridiculous.

FWIW I set up my next door neighbor’s Rachios and she loves them. She didn’t know how to do it on her own. She didn’t know how to set them up but when I walked her through it she had the same exact complaint. "Why can’t they function as one unit I thought they were smart?’ Literally her words.

[tmcgahey]

@Demitry

Sheesh. Have you ever pulled appart a Rachio and seen whats actually inside? Or…used the OpenSprinkler to make that comment? Their webUI is no less complicated, well documented, and no less intuitive. ZERO coding is required. You connect the unit, use a phone or web browser to connect it to your wifi (or leave it in self ap mode) network and configure your schedule. How is this any more difficult to Rachio…doesn’t even need an App.

I’m aware that the Rachio hardware is just a fairly PCB with a few proprietary features. But to say that it is just as simple as Rachio is a stretch. How would my 76 year old mom remotely connect to her OpenSprinkler system from her beach house in Mexico if needed? Explaining to her how to set up and use OTC tokens isn’t happening. I’m not saying OpenSprinkler isn’t a decent product for what it is, but like HomeAssisant or other opensource products, it is for the techie people out there. What is simple for you isn’t simple for a VAST majority of the population.

@Demitry

When it comes to providing this particular key feature (merging multiple units into one schedule) there is NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE until Rachio does what they say nobody needs. This feature is long overdue and frankly not complicated to implement.

The code is open source all Rachio engineers would have to do is look to learn how to do it. But when faced with this issue the only replies have been that “its too complicated”. It’s not at all complicated as multiple users in these “merging” threads that come up repeatedly have pointed out.

I’m sure you could send @franz your coding resume and the idea of taking the open source code from OpenSprinkler and how to implement into Rachio. Maybe all he needs is some direction for his team.

And to be clear, I don’t believe Rachio has ever said it was something nobody needs.

[Demitry]

If you go through this thread Franz didn’t appear very receptive to this feature if you check the tone of his replies. I don’t want to requote all of them here as the thread exists but it’s there to read.

The gist was that it was “too complicated”, “few people would benefit” “few need more than 16 zones” (It’s not about zone quantity it’s about number of valve sets), “we tried but it’s too complex”.

I would argue this would greatly separate Rachio from competition and in fact add a much needed feature for everyone with multiple valve sets and Rachio units combining what is probably the best UI and Intuitive feature set with what you could then call a smart controller.

URGENT: Need fix to multiple Rachio units so they work as one system

Plus one more who would like to integrate more than 16 zones into one controller. I do not own a second Rachio and I’m not sure I will for my next 8 plus zones.

I don’t know if the above is what he actually believes or just what his “engineers” told him at that time to make it seem this complex.

Smart Lighting solutions constantly create virtual control sets by combining separate light bulbs each with its own IP address (hardly any different from rachio switches) into one set so multiple “separate” lights can come on and off on a schedule or with one button/action or condition, even the most basic Chinese knockoffs.

So what Rachio is essentially saying here is that IF Rachio’s were controling light bulbs instaed of valves that you couldn’t combine them into a virtual group in your APP. That each has to stand on it’s own and be managed separately. The mobile App can see and select multiple units to be managned but can’t merge them into a larger virtual controller? It’s insane and I’m not buying the “complexity” narrative.

If it can be done manually by the user in the app, then it should be easily accomplished with software.

Rachio A - uses Schedule A and has a unique IP address and 8 ports (switches)
Rachio B - uses Schedule B and has a unique IP address and 8 ports (switches)

Whats required is the creation of a virtual “GROUP” C that uses a new Schedule C that resides in your cloud (Rachio’s DB), (ignores Schedule A & B) and sends requests to either Rachio A and/or B.

Virtual Rachio C now has available (16 virtual ports from two sets of physical ports) - ports 1(1a),2(2a),3(3a),4(4a),5(5a),6(6a),7(a),8(a) AND Rachio B - ports 9(1b),10(2b),11(3b),12(4b),13(5b),14(6b),15(7b),16(8b)

Rachio A saves the schedule dictated by cloud Virtual Rachio C Schedule associated with it’s ports while Rachio B receives schedule dictated by Vrirtual Rachio C Schedule associated with it’s ports.

This is a cloud/app solution that would require little change and all cloud based weather adjustment controls currently used can be applied to the new interface Schedule C interface. (if this is too complex just make this feature available for fixed schedules only). This on your DB end should simply look like the customer has a 3rd device and on their App end they would see A and B grouped into a new virtual Rachio

Conversely you could do what OpenSprinkler is doing and designate a Master/Slave unit where the master extends virtual ports and associates the said ports with slave ports on the other units and maintains the schedule of all physical and virtual (extended) ports on the slave units with one schedule on the Master which you then sync with the rest of your adjustment algorithms.

[Thomas_Lerman]

Without looking at the actual code, it is always easy to postulate on how things work and how easy it would be to change. I also find myself doing that, but recognize that I do not know the underlying code to accurately say.

I have a Rachio 3 (#1) for my sprinklers and a Rachio Smart Hose Timer (#2) currently connected. Yes, I wish that they knew about the existence of each other. The simplest with my limited view SEEMS like, for example, #2 would check to see if any of the schedules on the #1 (or others) will be running when my hose schedule is supposed to start. If so, delay the start (for how long?). When #1 is done with any series of schedules, alert #2. Et cetera. As I trying to express this, I am realizing it is not as simple as I thought and I skipping having more controllers, prioritizing the controllers, and blacklisting controllers that are not be at the same site (like home, rentals, or something). So, I start thinking of other alternatives such as what you are saying. Maybe ground controllers together for each site. It seems leaving A & B available while creating a virtual C would add complexity as well.

[Demitry]

Rachio’s API is limited but well documented. What I’ve described is already “possible” and reletively “easy” IF you use your own schedule app/service that then issues calls to your Rachio units via Rachio’s API… but I’m not about to go out and configure this in my spare time. I am busy with projects. Could I do this? YES but OpenSprinkler has already done this in their WebUi. (One might even be able to use OpenSprinkler’s scheduler to issue external calls to any Rachios you might have) I’m only pointing out that even now if somebody was inclined enough they could use Rachio’s existing API to accomplish the above for themselves but this process is not for the majority of users, would require some programing, knowledge of API etc…I won’t even call it “coding”. Why Rachio won’t do it is odd to me. Yes you might lose some (shouldn’t if done by Rachio) the fancy weather adjustments but frankly I think the weatherman is often wrong so I use manual timing and adjust as needed. If all that’s needed is the merging of schedules for two or more independent Rachios it’s likely possible with IFTTT and something like GoogleCal but I’m not about to hack something I feel should be native.

[tmcgahey]

@Demitry

So what Rachio is essentially saying here is that IF Rachio’s were controling light bulbs instaed of valves that you couldn’t combine them into a virtual group in your APP. That each has to stand on it’s own and be managed separately. The mobile App can see and select multiple units to be managned but can’t merge them into a larger virtual controller? It’s insane and I’m not buying the “complexity” narrative.

I think what you are forgetting here, which @franz eluded to in his post that you quoted, is that if all Rachio was doing was managing fixed schedules across multiple controllers (ie, your lightbulb analogy), it probably would be fairly “easy”. But for the MUCH more complex Flex Daily schedules, that are constantly running in a very dynamic world, this could be a much bigger task and require the necessary changes that @franz mentioned.

[Demitry]

@tmcgashey Yes exactly. I’m not buying the inflated complexity you think is there. Its not. What I’ve seen is a word salad of technical terms meant to tell the average user not familiar with them that they are complex. I know EXACTLY how these units operate and frankly my suggestion to turn them into dumb units that execute a master schedule from a virtual controller is a good solution. The complexity is then greatly simplified as it addresses the whole narrative that managing separate devices is difficult. GOOD…combine them into one virtual device and now…guess what? Now you have ONE device to manage and one schedule. Its less complexity not more. Perhaps if it can be explained to me how network connected relays are complex but good luck. I deal with actual complexity at work on a daily basis.

Also the fact that there is some “dynamic” (another salad term) schedule adjustments being applied to schedules is IRRELEVANT because these changes can be applied to a unified table just the same. It has NOTHING to do with that. The fact is that these are just network connected switches and making them out to be some sort of complex device akin to rocket trajectory maintenance is just unnecessary.

I currently have OpenSprinkler units doing just that and with weather/sensor adjustments available.

Whats Rachio needs is for the “complexity” being applied to individual separate units that cant even keep from interfering with each other to remove that complexity from individual units and apply that complexity to a unified schedule made up of one or multiple devices.

Currently I have 2 valve sets comprising of 3 valves each. One outdoor housed controller controlling the back yard valves and one in the garage controlling the front yard valves. So 6 valves to operate in total.

The unit in the garage is the main controller that has three of its ports mapped (pointed to IP and port) to the first three ports on the unit on the back patio. All the valves become part of a sequential schedule (meaning they run in sequence and wont rob water pressure regardless if the user overlaps schedules they will wait for one to finish before starting the next), the three valves in my front yard run a repeating schedule set to repeat 4 times throughout the night at 2-3 min a piece…(I have a slightly sloping front lawn and need to do this to minimize runoff) the back yard units run twice (once in the late evening and once in the early morning).

I currently don’t but could apply weather adjustments (multiple choices), sensor or rain delays etc to the the schedule OR I can adjust ALL the valves in unison by trimming them on a % basis by reducing the run time percentage.

If I could do the above with Rachio units I would and so would a bunch of folks. I currently can only recommend Rachio to people with one valve set while to anybody with multiple valve sets I recommend OpenSprinkler.

10 Years is more than enough time to figure this out…

[JBTexas]

I relate this discussion to the astounding statistic about Apple iPhones – that almost half of the owners of those phones have never installed an app on them that wasn’t already there when they purchased it.

Looking at the world as an engineer, as I do every day, I would be sure that everyone who buys a $300 sprinkler controller that one can configure and forget about would do what it took to justify the purchase. You can ask @franz, but I also think it’s likely that half of all the Rachio’s installed are running fixed schedules, which the owner configured and forgot about. Steve Jobs understood - less is more, in so many ways.

[tmcgahey]

@JBTexas

but I also think it’s likely that half of all the Rachio’s installed are running fixed schedules, which the owner configured and forgot about. Steve Jobs understood - less is more, in so many ways.

Oh, I 100% agree. I think a ton of people just wanted the ability to handle the programing of schedules from their couch as opposed to standing in front of their controller.

[tmcgahey]

@Demitry

Also the fact that there is some “dynamic” (another salad term) schedule adjustments being applied to schedules is IRRELEVANT because these changes can be applied to a unified table just the same. It has NOTHING to do with that. The fact is that these are just network connected switches and making them out to be some sort of complex device akin to rocket trajectory maintenance is just unnecessary.

It isn’t a salad term. Flex Daily schedules are lightyears ahead of the basic fixed schedules that OpenSprinkler can do. Whether there are 10% of users running Flex Daily or 50%, it is still there. Clearly you are a programing expert, and I’m just a dumb salesman of municipal and ag piping materials, but neither of us know the architecture of the Rachio system. It is a cloud hosted platform, not a local software running on RPi hardware. Each controller registered to the cloud has some kind of “home” that makes merging them together more complicated. I can assure you that @franz and his team aren’t choosing not to implement a feature like this just because they don’t want to spend 5 minutes re-writing some code. It must be more complex than that, plain and simple.

[Demitry]

Yes OpenSprinkler can do this too and maybe more…see attached. Lightyears ahead? Maybe? But probably not. FlexDaily schedules is just weather adjustment. Nice marketing term.

The fact that Rachios are cloud driven makes what is being described (merging schedules) easier not harder (the cloud is 20+ years old not some mystery). This I know for a fact.

If the feature by some chance (there is no valid reason mentioned though and likely because there isn’t one) interferes then it can always be disabled for those merging units.

It’s time for Franz to take some god honest feedback that’s nearing 10years in the making. I simply think they’ve sold enough units without this feature that they don’t see it necessary. It’s only the disappointment of anyone with more than one valve set that they can’t see or measure.

I’ve also already pointed out that being a cloud solution their API ALREADY (I have to assume it works) lists the features that would be required to make this work and anybody with a programing background that wants to waste their time writing their own scheduler can make it happen today.

[Demitry]

@tmcgahey See all this guy (@SAR ) has to do is connect his spreadsheet to the API to automate it…but it’s too complex for Rachio? You’re giving them way too much credit on the “complexity” side of this feature.

Also you mentioning FlexDaily Weather Adjustment is just ironic because it’s essentially a feature that anyone with more than one controller can’t use because the “dynamic” schedules of the units inevitably wind up overlapping so these folks are stuck on fixed manually managed schedules which is precisely WHY Rachio needs an ability to unify units into one schedule because for these folks below (@Siliconkiwi , @sailingtwidget ) the only thing Rachio accomplishes is making it easier to enter the schedules manually into a GUI vs tapping buttons on OG dumb units.