It says what the devices are in the first line of the first post.
I have an Aeotec aërQ device as well. I also have about 20 ring gen2 door window sensors I added with SmartStart. As i recall the key with that Aeotec sensor was to add it to SmartStart first then pull the battery Tag. It was wonky otherwise for me. With that said though the Ring sensors added flawlessly one after the other. Most of them would include within a min or two. I would scan the qr code pull the battery tab and mount. By the time I was done mounting them they were included and ready to be named.
1 Like
Thanks, I saw that. However I wanted to know if there were any other. A broad statement of Aeotec devices was made at one point.
Therefor it's reasonable to ask for exactly what devices were tried.
And this is, in fact exactly how SiL said it is supposed to be done for all devices added via SmartStart, and the reason it is Step 5 of the procedure, after Step 4 (scan the QR code). 
1 Like
The first attempt was exactly like that - followed the instructions precisely , well when the instructions actually aligned with the current App 
The subsequent attempts involved removing battery and re-inserting it.
The HE App did lots of odd things - scan QR code and it showed up 4 times in display.
For the first few hours all I did was follow the instructions.
At one point when checking the zwave details I noticed it had added a device without the dialog asking about S0/2 etc.
The last part of the few hours was about using classic inclusion, which would not work apparently because of the 6 ghost devices created during SMARTSTART.
After 90 minutes of continuous pressing remove managed to remove 4 of the six ghost devices.
The remaining two are now - I am told, are blocking inclusion and to resolve this I need to get a windows PC up and running and get a usb zwave controller and the silabs software - it will be a while before I can get all that up and running.
My experience was that remove didn't actually remove the device until I performed a reboot of the hub. I had a number of ghost devices from trying to get my ZSE40 joined without security and trying to delete, remove, etc did nothing until I gave up and finally rebooted the hub at which time the entries were finally cleared. This was with firmware 2.2.6.13x on a C7.
Sure is. I missed the comment about all AEOTEC Gen 7 devices.
That statement is in response to the statement above that there is a bug in the silabs 700 firmware that caused the issues with zwave inclusion.
Ok got a Windows PC, got a zwave USB controller (Aeotec) signed up as a developer to get silabs dev kit and specifically the App PC Controller. Moved the Hubitat Hub next to PC - required network updates to resolve vlan issues by moving it from its dedicated switch.
Was able to remove the Hubitat Ghost zwave devices that had been created when Hubitat stalled - ie found a device then locked in initialising stage resulting in a Ghost Device.
Following battery replacements for the two Aeotec Aerq (at £5.99 each) as they were drained by the repeated failed Inclusion attempts, I managed after three or four attempts each to Include them onto the Hubitat.
To ensure they had the very best opportunity - I performed the Inclusions 4 inches from the Hubitat - should I have tried to get them closer?
Anyway they are up and running.
But my experience with Hubitat and Zwave is that best to avoid zwave if possible.
Once working it is being really reliable - but introducing new devices is not a welcoming experience.
I understand Hubitat is new and I am sure it will improve,
I understand others have had a better experience, and I wish them well, it could be that I just have a bad HE unit.
I have about another 15 zwave devices to add to Hubitat and understand that it will take me about a week to do it, but realistically - once it is up it is solid, I am so impressed on how this Hubitat is managing the Hot Water and the Heating systems.
So is the pain worth it, absolutely, once this is done, I should be able to forget about the Hubitat managing the Heating and it should just do it without any further engagement by me.
I have another Hubitat I am running zigbee on which seems a lot more stable for inclusions, and will focus on that.
The only other thing then is to add in MQTT so I can monitor the two Hubitats and force reboot/hard reboots if necessary.
Keep in mind too close is (almost) as bad as too far (for ANY wireless technology)... Typically for any wireless radios you want a device to be at least 1 wavelength away.
It isn't always a problem when you are closer than that (reflected signals from walls/floors/etc can still be >1 wavelength for instance even if the device is closer than that), but strange things can (and in my personal experience often do) happen <1 wavelength away that don't happen >1 wavelength away.
For zwave that is ~33cm.
For zigbee/2.4GHz wifi it is ~13cm.
For 5GHz wifi is ~5-6cm.
Why? Putting receiving devices too close to a reflective surface increase chances for reflection induced multi-path phase cancellation.
Also, putting receivers too close to the transmitter also increases likelihood of an overload on the input stage of the receiver due to too high signal strength.
Certainly an understandable position, and one you are fully entitled to of course!
1 Like
Thanks
Fantastic explanation really useful!!!
So rule of thumb optimum Inclusion range for a
zwave device 1 foot (~)
and
zigbee 6 inches (~) in old money
Got it.
Not encountered these Inclusion issues before - with largely the same zwave devices so maybe there is something in the suggestion of buggy silabs 700 firmware, or maybe it is because of having the zwave controller built into the device and not on the end of a usb lead?
I don't know the answer.
My belief is that the pairing and exclusion issues are largely on the SiLabs software side.
But it could be partly in Hubitat's implementation, too, as other ZWave 700 hubs I have access to tend act a bit differently.
That isn't scientific, though, as those other hubs are also running a different version of the SiLabs software - and have largely different issues (but still also have zwave issues).
Moral of the story - if zwave stability is #1 to you, stick with Zwave 500.
1 Like
Sagely advice indeed, how do you change Hubitat Elevation C7 to 500 series? Is there a switch on it somewhere - I can 't see one.
You can't, at least not any way I know of. Can always buy a used C-5 hub though.
Of course then you lose smartstart and S2 security, if that matters to you.
If you want 500 + smartstart + S2 you have to look at non-Hubitat options.
1 Like
Can't get SmartStart to work, so far it just generates a lot of ghost devices that require 3rd party tools to clean up - so no loss there.
S2 seems to cause all sorts of issues so I have been encouraged to use no security on zwave devices in Hubitat so no loss there.
I have been searching for Hubitat C5 but Hubitat don't seem to sell them 
Having just gone through a mass migration to HE over the last 4 months - reluctant to start over again.
So will live with limitations and hope improvements come
Once I have the Heating HE Hub fully loaded with the devices I need to manage the Heating and Hot Water I'll lock it down and just use the Zigbee HE Hub for playing with.
Looking at another HA to play parent to the HE hubs and use MQTT to link them up.
I am experiencing the same issue
Honestly i used SmartStart exclusively for all of My Ring Gen 2 gear. In most cases it only took about 1-2 min from adding the code and then pulling the battery tab.
I also use S2 allot. Almost all my gear is zwave 700 and having security enables hasn't been a problem at all. I don't enable it on any older gear though and if something adds with S0 it is immediately excluded until i can get it to no security
The only time i did have issues with ghosts and SmartStart was when at limita of the radio range. Thag caused some strange results including ghosts.
It's not a dismal failure, just poorly implemented.
No, these are not ghost nodes. The device DID include and is functioning. the app just isn't updating to reflect that. Smartstart DOES include using the QR code (check your devices list). Like pretty much everything else with the app it doesn't work quite right. Specifically, the app never updates that the device was included. I have devices still showing pending months later, even though they have been included and are in use. Like you, I was frustrated with this. But once I figured this small but essential detail out, it's not really a problem other than the extra step to double-check the devices list. I had a thread similar to this a few months ago in which I figured it out.. Also, It doesn't do you any good to name the device in SmartStart when you add it. It will include the device with the generic name and will name any subsequent devices the same (in Smartstart). Either way, you'll end up going into devices to rename them. The biggest advantage I see is adding stuff withS2 security, and not having to enter all those numbers from the DSK. For Zigbeee or Zwave that doesn't have the DSK numbers, it just as easy to include the "classic" way.
Generally, I'm finding I use the actual habitat app less and less, except for the Smartstart. Either the dashboards are clunky (more so now that I have started using Hubivue and Hubitat Dashboard app). Geofencing with the app is a complete joke. Yeah, I have it as part of my presence solution, but nothing is dependent on it alone. Finally, I just don't see the need to use the app to do anything on the hub when I can just bookmark the hub's IP address and access it directly that way. There was a time that Hubitat was hesitant to put out an app (and I believe they still feel the app is a side item, a distraction), and the more I play with alternatives, I'm starting to understand why. I really almost believe they should just bag the app altogether. It hasn't been updated for a while, and I don't believe there is even a current beta in development, even though if you look through the forum, there are plenty of documented issues to be addressed.
Including my Ring Motion sensors was where I was FINALLY able to get Smart Start to work correctly. prior to that It wasn't really doing any thing .
I really do believe this is where the value of Smart Start comes in , when dealing with the DSK numbers, especially if you have to enter the WHOLE number, not just the first 5 digits. If you are adding stuff without security, I really don't see much value of using SmartStart over doing it the "classic" way.
1 Like
