Using Multiple Else-IF Statements for detailed RULE

[JdThomas24]

Intent :
IF office light is on and or occupied, Turn on the AC OR heat, depending on the temperature of the sensor in the room.

As i got to the 3rd Else-IF statement, it would not let me detail as i did the previous.

I wanted to add a last ESLE-IF.

IF temp is <= 66, and Light or off, or motion not detected,
Then set thermostat office to heat 67, auto
Once 67 is reached
Resume program

[bertabcd1234]

What's stopping you? It's not clear from the screenshot. You need to go into "Create New Action" to add this--the "ELSE" and "END-IF" buttons are there for convenience, but they're also in this menu, and there has never been such a button for "ELSE-IF" (it requires additional information, the expression, to complete the action; these simple ones don't). Is that it?

[JdThomas24]

@bertabcd1234 was able to get it to add 3rd ELSE-IF..... I had to save and clear it out and go back in,, was not giving me AND/OR additions for some reason....

Does anyone see an issue with the rule?
Had to do in 2 screenshots due to screen size I'm using right now.. sorry

[tray_e]

I do something similar. Basically, in temperature extremes, I do not want my "away" setbacks being used. So, I use this to create a hold.I found that the numbers I initially set up did not always work the way I meant for them to.

My first recommendation would be to use Hub Variables instead of hard coded values for the temperature comparison. So, I created hub variables that I can just change at will without having to go in and edit my rule. I have highlighted where I use the variables.

Interestingly, I just noticed that my conditions all have the "unused" flag even though they are clearly used.

My Rule

My second recommendation would be to use a >= or <= as appropriate. You have bracketed several different temperatures with > value and < same value. What happens if at the time of comparison it equals that value. Happens more often than you think. So, instead of >69 and <69, consider >=69 and < 69.
**** Edited to add - Disregard my second note, I see that you did that. Apparently, I have reading issues today

[JdThomas24]

@tray_e LOL

Thank you-- I'm testing some new things out with rules and combining other ones. I'm now into the thermostat and removing Ecobee scheduling and using the Ecobee suites.... Now, i need to do ALOT of testing...

I just want to make sure i did not go overboard with these. I will look into variables and maybe not hard coding a temp. I am in Texas and there are huge swings during periods of the year.

[jpcurcio]

I'm not sure what you're trying to do with this rule...

First conditional-- you are checking for temperature > 77°, and light on or motion. Then, in the second conditional, you're also checking for temp > 77°, and light off or no motion. The only way that the second conditional will be seen is if both are off, since if either one is true, it will already have been evaluated to true in the first conditional and it would skip this one.

If I assume you want to use light on or motion to determine occupancy, I would rewrite the rule like this:

if(temp>77) then
  if(motion or light on) then
    set temp to 75°, etc.
  else
    set temp to 76°, etc.
  endif
endif

I would then create a separate rule for turning on the heat, using the same logic.

I also wonder why you are setting the temperature a single degree apart for occupied vs. non-occupied; I typically use about a 10° difference (e.g., heat to 65° when home, down to 55° when away).

[JdThomas24]

@jpcurcio

I would then create a separate rule for turning on the heat, using the same logic.

@jpcurcio -- testing for now.