Lol. Made me laugh 
The key to a happy marriage is z-wave associations lol
6 Likes
About a month ago (maybe two - who can tell time anymore) I was having some zwave db issues and Bobby was helping me out, I had my hub off for a time out and walked into my work room and hit a switch, realized only half the lights came one, then remembered the hub was off, then click, the association turned on the second half.
I didn’t realize association was point to point. I still thought it worked via the hub. It was definitely slower, but still worked.
1 Like
As well, and what I didn’t notice until I added an association just last week, is that associations do not show as changing states in the device. For example if you turn a light on via an association it does not show that light as changing states to on in the hub.
That can cause obvious issues if you have rules that take place when something changes a state because it will not show as changed.
2 Likes
I have a fake 5-way setup for our upstairs hallway light - 3 switches (Zen23v3) are power only (no-load) and one Zen24v4 Dimmer which is the real light. I had Z-Wave associations set and it worked but was on the slow side - you could hear the "popcorning" relays as they tried to sync. I removed the associations and set "smart bulb" mode on for each switch (no physical or z-wave control) then changed my rules to handle buttons instead of switch events.. It is working really well now - and very fast. Extra bonus - no more relay clicks..
1 Like
So much better in general to create rules for stuff instead of associations. Things generally work faster as people have commented and the state of the switch will always be correct in your zwave network.
1 Like
I had previously tried using "switches" and syncing also via mirrorsync but it was too problematic. Any lag caused major issues syncing all the switches - some wouldn't sync, sometimes I would get a ping-pong effect where the light would flash on and off for a bit.
Z-wave associations were better but still had the popcorn effect - I never noticed that the main switch would get out of sync with the hub though.. maybe it did.
Going the button event route is what finally made everything work.. fast and accurate with no clicking relays.
On a side note I am using Node-RED for all my rules logic not RM. 
My experience and I’ve heard from others as well that it is not the main switch that gets out of sync with the hub but rather the second switch that’s being associated with the main switch by double clicking on the main switch.
Maybe we are saying the same thing but our nomenclature is just different? Anyways… Point being that it’s much better to create a rule I think.
BTW. I am still a Webcore guy for Rules. Never changed since my old smartthings days. Lol
1 Like
Interesting thanks - yeah the secondary switches I didn't care about anyway so all good.
I really liked webCoRE with SmartThings and tried it for a bit on Hubitat but it was too early in it's iteration and was problematic. I've since moved on.. but still like the interface.
1 Like
FIFY 
- "The key to a happy marriage is Lutron! lol"
2 Likes
I wish I could say that in our house but nope - the look is a non-starter.. we have traditional toggle style switches. Have managed to sneak some in the basement and use a few for remote control... so a toe is in the water at least.
2 Likes
Can’t generalize it that quickly.
I am using associations in only two place and both cases it is a pair of zen26’s.
Using BC or RM the second switch is not 100%. Four out of five times it would turn on properly and the other time it would click on then off again. Sometimes twice. Is it a Zooz problem? Maybe. Never had a problem with turning off.
In one case I have swapped the pair of zen26 with a new pair. Same thing. Many different FW versions etc.
Set the association in the master switch only for physical presses and it’s been solid and quicker for a year now.
Does sound like a Zooz problem I would think as rules to turn on the second switch when another one is turned on should always work, right?
My only experience is only with Jasco switches and I’ve never had a problem turning on a second switch with either an association or a rule.
1 Like
is there any way to get a deeper look in the Z-Wave network? Like a Z-Wave sniffer? Any recommendations?
(like tcpdump/wireshark for IP networks...)
They do.. It’s actually called Zniffer…
1 Like
For you people with slow association action, if you have the Jasco/GE switches, you can speed it up by changing to the alternate exclusion option on the device page of @jasonjoel 's driver. Mine went from a couple seconds to near instant. Of course, only for the Jasco/GE switches.
2 Likes
I was gonna say, all my associations are faster than anything a hub puts out.
Not only that, but most of my devices update to their lifeline when they’re turned on via association which is also dang near instant — and the two OOMI LEDs that don’t just get a refresh every 30 seconds.
Different use-cases for everyone, but the fallback layer here is completely necessary for me. 
@velvetfoot - can you explain what 'alternate exclusion option' means? I have @jasonjoel's drivers but have never used that because of not understanding how to and what it even is.
@adamkempenich Not sure what you mean by 'update to their lifeline'? I have never had a devices status sync correctly to the Hub if turned on via association.
Association group 0 is Lifeline, which I think only really became aa standard with Z-Wave+? A device will push updates to this node (usually) when it changes states.
But, not every device works the same with this. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear a number of devices don’t work like that. Inovelli devices, however, do.
3 Likes
Alternate exclusion are different keystrokes to exclude the device. The keystrokes are noted in the driver.
