Is there a new pallet component for the high CO2 sensor type 554 that is available for configuration?
Also, what is the format of the data coming in. The data field is not clear what the values are.
sensor_data : msg.payload : Object
object
nodeId: 0
firmware: 1
battery: “3.28”
battery_percent: “98.56”
counter: 6
sensor_type: 554
sensor_data: object
type: “unknown”
data: array[3]
0: 0
1: 3
2: 82
type: “sensor_data”
addr: “00:13:a2:00:42:37:68:1c”
received: 1770912216373
original: object
mac: “00:13:a2:00:42:37:68:1c”
receive_options: object
data: array[12]
type: “receive_packet”
[0 … 9]
0: 127
1: 0
2: 1
3: 3
4: 252
5: 6
6: 2
7: 42
8: 0
9: 0
[10 … 11]
10: 3
11: 82
Hi @danempiric sure, As this is a newly released sensor type, you may need to update your NCD Library to the temp-dev branch. If you are using the Enterprise IIoT Gateway, you can perform this update directly through Node-RED. Please find the specific flow and update procedure detailed below:
pull-from-temp-dev-flow.pdf (300.1 KB)
update-ncd-library.json (3.3 KB)
Please try this and share your results, thanks.
thanks that seems to work!
but it doesn’t seem to take any configuration for increaseing the reading frequency.
Hi @danempiric we’ve updated the tem-dev library to fix this. could you pull from temp-deb branch and try to configure the delay again please.
Thank you.
Hi, so rerun the same script?
Yes, use the Node-RED flow to pull from temp-dev branch.
Hi yes i’m available for a call, please email me a link.
1 Like
Hi @Eduardo_Mtz
We have the hight CO2 sensors online, but they are reading the inverse of the correct value . they were’t doing these before we updated the firmware.
If I remember correctly, we did not update the firmware on these devices.
Hi @danempiric During our last meetings, I recall we were receiving CO2 values around 680 ppm. Could you please verify that all internal and external connections on the device are secure? In the meantime, we will double-check the decoding logic within our library to ensure the data is being parsed correctly.
Hi,
the devices have been placed in a high CO2 environment so we do expect elevated readings.
is it possible that this could be due to the device being on Bat instead of External power?
Just to confirm, when we were receiving 680, it was a correct value? could you let us know what is the expected value now?
It shouldn’t affect it, but could you perform the test with external power and share the results. I’ve sent you an email