JP1 Remotes

Thanks for the help.

The link to TestGroup, http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload.php?action=file&file_id=4457, did not work and should be replaced by http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload.php?action=file&file_id=4992 and http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload.php?action=file&file_id=4459 ...

I did remember that there was a conflict originally with Activesync. I killed that process, but still am having problems getting IR.exe to verify the JP1.x interface connected to by OFA 10820 remote.

Com1 and Com2 set to 38400 baud, 8 bit, 2 stop, no parity, no flow/handshaking.

Any ideas of why ...

I must be forgetting something, since IR always fails the check interface. When I had this problem originally, I vaguely remember fixing it by installing the Delcom driver. If this is not used what might I be doing wrong?

Fred

I can't seem to get the Delcom USB driver to load. I remember having to trick my system the first time I installed it, but can't remember the details. After a system crash I need to reload the driver. As it is, IR.exe won't recognize my JP1.2 serial interface.

Please help

Thanks for the input. Some of my statement was actually a quotation from another site. The point being made was that there could be a frequency incompatibility. I already saw the one Barco file for an older CRT type and intend to try it. This projector is a 2000-2001 vintage LCD unit, so it is ...

Does anyone have a JP1 device file for the Barco BG 4000 video projector? The remote control at my former church is now missing and needs replacing.

I understand that all Barco projectors up till mid 2000 used the PPL remote codes, during 2000 the control codes were changed to the more common RC5 ...

My URC-10820 problem turned out to be 2-fold. The batteries had gotten weak enough in 1 day such that the remote was indicating an error condition. Replacing the batteries corrected the button delay issue, but only for a couple days. The supplier sent me a new remote.

Fred

I noticed that the URC-10820 remotes use 4 AAA batteries instead of two like the URC-8820. Also, the schematic shows a much more solid drive via Q31 (at R32). I may try to use my credit card remote to modify the URC-10820, since both are 6V. (I need to figure out why the 10820 is so slow in ...

It has been a while since I gave an update. Unfortunately, my modified URC-8820 evidently got something spilled on it (while still opened). I cleaned it well with alcohol, but the remote is no longer functional. It does still handle J1.2 programming, however. This happened before I built my ...

I've got to assume that it's a hardware problem then, rather than an upgrade problem. Hopefully Tommy's RF capture device will reveal the answer.
That sounds like the only possibility, unless maybe the bit polarity is totally backward or something. I assumed that if the X10 remote is outputting IR ...

I just noticed that someone else developed the same sort of upgrade for X10-RF a while ago, here's the file...

http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload.php?action=file&file_id=2193
Yes, I tried this device code earlier without success.

By the way, the other X10 modification articles just gave me ...

I also tried the X10 RF Device "X10dream.rmdu" last night. This is apparently supposed to send the entire string with house code, but did not work. This may indicate that something else is wrong. (It did give a list of Java errors when switching to the URC-8820, though). Even if it worked, it is a ...

I still don't know if other problems exist with my RF mod, but your confirmation of the "device" not transmitting house codes makes sense. The advanced IR543, however, is supposed to allow the remote to control the house code. I tried the hacked "device" (which includes the house codes) with ...

I located my soldering station and completed the mod wiring. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be functioning as anticipated. I do not know whether this is due to:

1. Something incorrect with the X10 device loaded into my URC-8820 ?
2. Inappropriate drive for the X10 RF modulator ?
3. Issues ...

I saw a couple warnings about counterfeits on the internet also, but am doubtful that any person or company would go to the trouble of producing a part and then miss-marking it. It is just not cost effective. It should be noted that improvements in processes could result in the transistor looking ...