Not receiving notifications, push of SMS. Any information I can provide?
Thanks
1 Like
@jasonjw12 @spacedemon101
I know this is a basic start at ā0ā troubleshooting. [quote=āethayer, post:1, topic:63022ā]
Verify that you have installed the SmartApp code into your IDE correctly - there are 2 steps - it should look like this in your IDE.
Once the App is installed and you have pulled it from the Marketplace -> My Apps -> you will do the set up of each userā¦ The notifications are set up here in this section ā¦
SCOLLING DOWN through the user set up page under āadditional Settingsā (see screen shot below 1 )
You will see notifications set up there - open this section ā¦ there is an entire of page of notifications to be set and enabled (see screen shot 2 below)
See if you review each of the above steps if you get notifications, if not reply back ā¦someone will try to help you.
I have this working so I know it does with the Schlage perfectly. The code is solid
1 Like
femwitjava - Thanks for the response and the screen shots. I have both the Lock Manager and the Lock User sub-app. Iāve added users and configured both push and SMS notifications, enabling all sliders. I had Lock Code Manager previously but after getting the betas installed I removed it from my Android phone and subsequently from the IDE. Now all I have is the Lock Manager and a configuration that, according to your instructions and screenshots should work.
Any additional suggestions would be very much appreciated.
Jason
Hi @ethayer. First I would like to thanks you for this great SmartApp.
And I would like to report that I got the following Errors on Live Logging when Resetting a User that was disabled:
ā2ā:ā42ā:ā04ā āPM: error java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot get property āidā on null object @ line 171
ā2ā:ā42ā:ā04ā āPM: error java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot get property āidā on null object @ line 198
Note: The reason the User was disabled is because Iāve changed the Lock āCodeā for this user but Lock Manager was not able to update the Lock (Kwikset 916 Z-Wave) after 10 retries.
Thanks,
Thanks for sharing this. That particular error is OK and expected. Itās a SmartThings bug where the parameter object within dynamic pages is not retained after a refresh. If can be safely ignored. You can just go back into the user list and reselect the page you were editing.
Thanks for clarifying. Iāll ignore those logs 
Any suggestions on my previous post about not receiving any notifications? Iām also not seeing the count of code usage increment (for any of the users Iāve defined.)
Thanks,
Jason
Those two things go hand-in-hand. You said youāve defined users in the app. Were those users that you programmed on the physical lock or were they programed to the lock using the app?
Possibility A-
The users youāve defined in the app donāt match up with the slots in the programming so when a user uses their code, the app doesnāt connect it with a defined user. Start by deactivating the users on the app and let the app delete the user codes. Once the user codes no longer work (and youāve tested that they donāt work on the physical lock) re-activate the users using the app.
Possibility B - (above step did not work, deleted users still have access)
It sounds like SmartThings is not getting information from your lock when itās used. This will cause notifications not to work and the increment to not update (because it uses the same information from the lock)
Make sure your lock is receiving data. If you can reliably lock/unlock the lock using the app, thatās a good sign. Another thing to check is to make sure the lock inclusion was āsecure inclusionā and not just the basic inclusion. If the secure inclusion failed, youāll get a message on SmartThings saying so, and some functions on the lock will be unavailable.
So first thing I would try is removing the lock from the network. After that, include the lock back in and insure that you did not receive en error about secure inclusion. If you did, a work-around you can do is remove the lock from the door and pair the lock with your network closer to the hub, then install the lock on the door after it was paired. If this does not work, youāll have to add powered z-wave devices between the closest well connected device (usually the hub itself) and where youāll to be installing the lock in order to make your mesh network more reliable. Each powered zwave device acts as a repeater to make the radio network more reliable.
1 Like
For clarification, do you have to install the custom device handler like the previous version? I am installing for the first time.
Thatās correct. A custom device handler is required.
1 Like
Iāve decided not to include the feature - āglobal schedulingā.
It doesnāt really make sense to me. I donāt see many people using it. I would think if someone wanted a schedule, it would be for a specific person, not everyone.
If you have a use case for āglobal schedulesā let me know. I think Iād rather work on something else, like key pad integration.
Settings for global notifications and hello home are done, I just canāt release it because I havenāt tested it yet. After the key pad stuff is done, Iām planning on removing the code for the old app.
1 Like
Makes sense.
And yes, a global schedule does seem very odd - why would you would want to block everyone on a scheduleā¦hmmm, maybe if you had a second home that you donāt use, but rent out, and only want renters to be able to access it during certain time frames? But still, any of that can be accomplished via scheduling for the user codes.
Thanks!
Erik, thanks for all your hard work on this.
Speaking of notifications, do you plan to support notifications via the contact book? Hereās my use case: I prefer push notifications over sms and I donāt want notifications when I unlock a door. My wife doesnāt need them when she opens the door either. Weād like to be able to see when the other person unlocks the door. I think the only way to stop notifications from going to the person who unlocks the door now is to use sms. It would be convenient to use the contact book for this.
Hi Erik,
I was able to get the beta installed and removed the production version that was there before, and setup my lock, and my wifes lock and they work. They existed before the udpate.
I added my daughter who isnāt scheduled, and a test account that is scheduled for time and date, and the schlage lock isnāt recognizing there codes. Is there something else I need to do to update the lock? Iāve hit refresh lock, rebooted the hub, no change.
Ed
Is the lock in the locked position when you are trying to update it? Iām not sure that is a requirement or if it was just coincidence that the one time mine wouldnāt update was while it was unlocked. When I tried again it was locked and it workedā¦
`[quote=ābcatz, post:134, topic:63022ā]
Speaking of notifications, do you plan to support notifications via the contact book?
[/quote]
Done.
Iām not sure! Are you using garyd9ās device type handler for your schlage lock? check the app logs and the lock info pages. Make sure your lock performed a secure inclusion with the hub, try other codes (could be you need to use a 4 digit code only for your schlage lock)
Coincidence. What do you mean by āupdateā? Do you mean change codes? No software made on SmartThings is actually installed on the device itself.
Hi Erik, the disable users for particular locks functionality doesnāt work for me at all.
If I go into User1 I created and scroll down to the Locks section at the bottom it tells me that both Lock1 & Lock2 are enable (i.e. neither one is disabled). If I go into Lock1 and slide the āDisable lock for this user?ā option and click Done it takes me to back to User1, but neither Lock1 or Lock2 are disabled : (
I am afraid to leave it like this as who know what will happen when the kids enter the wine cellar!
My setup: 2 Yale Keyless Connected Smart Locks (YD-01-CON-UG), with latest Lock Manager [BETA] from GitHub (Lock Manager & Lock User + Z-Wave Lock Reporting DH) using iOS (iPhone 6s)
Initially I didnāt realise I had to use the DH from the old Lock Code Manager with this BETA and started using the BETA Lock Manager & User child apps with the default Z-Wave Lock DH, which actually seemed to work in that it allowed me to create working users/codes, but reading down this thread it became clear that your bespoke DH was still required so Iāve now added it, but unfortunately this doesnāt fix the disable user for particular locks issue.
The much needed slot reporting that was added in your latest Lock Manager release seems to work fine:
Slot1
Code: 123456
USer1 // Entries: 1
However, as this shows up for both Lock1 & Lock2 it just confirms that the disable user per lock function didnāt work.
BTW any new User I create automatically has access to both locks (Lock1 & Lock2) attached to my one and only Samsung hub. Is this how it should work by default? ā¦ as a side note each lock supports 20 codes (4-8 digit), yet when I create a User and assign it to a particular slot, it blanks that slot on both locks.
As everything else seems to work just fine, could there be anything that I may have missed or have followed/done incorrectly?
PS Great work on creating this app by the way
Bummer, it works for me and at least 1 other person.
Being in a BETA and even using someoneās community created code, I think a little bit of head banging is to be expected. Iām a one man band for the most part. I donāt have a lot of time to create documentation and how-tos so thatās up to you guys. Itās on my radar, but low priority. Thatās the crux part of ST allowing community to create apps like this. They would have a team work on this, with people doing QA, Documentation, User stories, tutorials and supportā¦ except thatās all just me.
The code for the DTH is in the repository, so that was to be the first hint that itās needed. Iāll write some documentation on this, but thatās not a priority at all.
Odd. What platform are you using? Android? iOS? I have not experienced this, and this functionality works great for me.
Noted. Most locks support 30 codes, but some support only 10, some 20, and some 250ā¦ Iāll be re-writing some of the checks to take into account the lowest available slot count. (if you pair a 250 slot lock with a 10 slot, youāll only be getting 10 available slots) Another reason I havenāt done this yet is because of the 250 slot lock. Itās a lot of slots and doing the logic loop 250 times over each time might be hitting the ST rate limiting on apps. Iāll have to optimize a lot of things and so on.
Truth! This list takes some time to update, so you might not see the correct data in the info pane for a few minutes after the code is deleted, however in your case if youāre not seeing the boolean for ādisable userā set to TRUE in the first place, you have other problems. Problems I may not be able to solve given that it works for me. Might be a SmartThings bug. Again, what platform are you using? Might want to report this to ST support.
1 Like
Thank you Erik. This new version works easier than the last and is more intuitive. I experienced some issues installing but traced that down to the link between the Schlage lock and hub. Removed the lock, factory reset it, reincluded it, added the front door to Lock Manager (which was already set for our garage door lock) andā¦it didnāt work. Looked int he logs and noticed that because of the factory reset it was back to a code length of 4. Changed that to 7 on the lock andā¦it didnāt work. Opened up a user and hit done and it seemed to force an update to the lock. I donāt know if that was just coincedental timing or not. All in all, donāt forget the little things. Excellent, thank you for your efforts and for providing the code!
2 Likes
Hi thanks for coming back so quicklyErik. I am using the the ST app on iOS (iPhone 6s) and I also have a Win10 desktop with Firefox browser on both.
I probably should have realised this straight away, but initially followed the instructions given in the āSee this community postā link (by Danabw) and forgot about the DHT. The odd thing was that the default āZ-Wave Lockā DTH did actually seem to work with your SmartApp, so I didnāt realise straight away and simply forgot about it at first and the DHT only resurfaced after I run into the disable user issue and started looking into possible causes.
On second thoughts what I really meant to say was that your lock reporting functionality seems to work well. The fact that both the slots on the two locks were written to only confirms the default User setup behaviour across multiple locks connected to the same ST hub. All right so by default it seems to write to both of them, which may seem great at first, but then it also marks that slot unavailable across both locks! In my opinion this is not ideal, it would be a nice to have option for certain circumstances where someone wants to do this specifically i.e. write to concurrent locks, but there are very good counter arguments why this is not advisable. Let me give you a real world example:
Each lock (Yale keyless smartlock in my case) is usually limited to a reasonable amount of separately code-able slots, 20 in my case, but in effect what is happening now is that for each User we create we seem to loose a slot across every lock, so for two users we loose 4 slots in total and so on. If we then have a scenario where even more locks are added to the same ST hub the total of unusable slots will also increase per created user. Given that we only have 20 slots to play with across all locks it wouldnāt be too difficult to run out of programmable slots e.g. a small B&B etc that wants to do plan ahead and pre-program users based on the coming days/week/month. Additionally to prevent unauthorised access to other locks, you will have to go and disable access for numerous locks (provided this functionality even works) that you didnāt want to grant access to. So even though the multiple write across slots may seem great, it is just as likely to create far more work in a scenario such as the one I mentioned.
Again perhaps Iāve overlooked something, but I would much rather be able to use your app to control each Lock individually. This is how I envisaged any semi-official app working, without any nice to have features.