Unterschiede

Hier werden die Unterschiede zwischen zwei Versionen angezeigt.

--- hardware:vaillantvrt340f_protocol [2017/05/11 19:23] – reinhold
+++ hardware:vaillantvrt340f_protocol [2017/05/11 19:28] (aktuell) – reinhold
@@ Zeile 150: / Zeile 150: @@
 ==== UPDATE: Making sense of the 0xFD byte 13 ====
-The byte 13 with unknown constant value 0xFD kept bothering me, and a few days after I understood the checksum byte I figured out its meaning too: As I mentioned, bytes 4-12 together with the checksum byte 14 summed up always yielded 0x0300. It seemed strange to me that the 0x03 byte of the sum was somehow ignored, until I realized that 0xFD is actually the binary complement of 0x03, i.e. the checksum is actually just byte 14, but the two-byte value of bytes 13 and 14. So, our assumption that bytes 13 with a value of 0xFD is some kind of End-Of-Data or separator byte was simply wrong, and it being constant is just a coincidence.
+The byte 13 with unknown constant value 0xFD kept bothering me, and a few days after I understood the checksum byte I figured out its meaning too: As I mentioned, bytes 4-12 together with the checksum byte 14 summed up always yielded 0x0300. It seemed strange to me that the 0x03 byte of the sum was somehow ignored, until I realized that 0xFD is actually the binary complement of 0x03, i.e. the checksum is actually not just byte 14, but the two-byte value of bytes 13 and 14. So, our assumption that bytes 13 with a value of 0xFD is some kind of End-Of-Data or separator byte was simply wrong, and it being constant is just a coincidence.
-In short, bytes 13 and 14 are simply the binary negative of the sum of bytes 4-12, with most significant byte first, i.e. bytes 13+14 interpreted as a signed integer is -sum(byte 4-12). As we are summing up only 9 bytes, there will be no overflow, either (which was what was bothering me with the 0x03 when one understood only byte 14 as the checksum).
+In short, bytes 13 and 14 are the binary negative of the sum of bytes 4-12, with most significant byte first, i.e. bytes 13+14 interpreted as a signed integer is -sum(byte 4-12). As we are summing up only 9 bytes, there will be no overflow, either (which was what was bothering me with the 0x03 when one uses only byte 14 as checksum).
@@ Zeile 191: / Zeile 191: @@
 Let's print all observed values of the heating byte in correlation with the difference between target and current room temperature:{{:hardware:vaillant_calormatic340f:vaillant_calormatic340f_heatingbyte_tempdifference.png?direct|}}
 The values of this chart were observed for room temperatures of 22, 22.5, 23, 23.5 and 24°C, but the current room temperature has no influence on the heating byte, only the difference to the target temperature. As observed above, the same temperature difference can lead to different heating bytes, but apparently, the possible intervals for each temperature difference are not overlapping. This is an indication that the wireless control displays the temperature only in 0.5°C steps, but measures the current room temperature (and thus the difference to the target) in higher accuracy.