Is it possible to define a virtual switch (flag, boolean, call it whatever) in ewelink? This would be super useful.
A device supported by assistant platforms, such as Amazon and Google, could then be integrated into the ewelink ecosystem easily. For instance, I have a video intrusion system and a door lock that is supported by Alexa, but not by ewelink. Setting a switch from Alexa on set events from these devices, would allow me to run ewelink scenes.
Right now, I’m using s physical 4 unit relay for this, but it is a clunky solution.
Yes, I know that. But that only covers that scenario. Lots of devices cannot trigger routines on Amazon, and it is not possible to trigger auto scenes in ewelink from devices that it does not support. All that could be done if only ewelink supported virtual switches.
I had felt exactly the same need to be able to define some more complex scenes. Also in my case I ended up having to use some “sonoff micro” to overcome the problem.
Being able to define a virtual switch would indeed be a fantastic feature.
You use to able to set Booleans in Apilio.IO when it was free, which would connect to IFTTT and then eWeLink (both also were free). Now to do complex stuff in the cloud you need eWeLink premium, Ifttt and Apilio subscriptions.
If people use devices they make money: I think they should allow more complexity for subscribers to eWeLink Advanced to encourage subscriptions to the plan.
I agree 100%. I also use unnecessary physical devices to then test in the scene whether it should be done. If it was just virtual and could be named and used in scenes, that would be great. And it’s not just ON/OFF states, but I would use it, for example, for The maximum temperature is set to 22.5°C. But we probably want that too much and the manufacturers would lose sales of the device.
Yes, that’s a possibility.
Let’s say - I have 5 PIRs in 5 houses, want to examine which PIR was hit.
PIR 1 works during 00-05 min
PIR 2 during 05-10 min
Etc
Then I can see which PIR was active, by looking at time.
Drawback: clumsy. And every PIR will not always react if motion doesn’t occur for time longer than 20 minutes.
I need a webhook and a computer, a program looping very fast (0,1 seconds) to be sure every PIR has seen what I want to be seen.
A better solution would be cells in the server memory, an I can read cells (bit 0/1). That’s a need for not only me. IFTTT has that feature, it can sense a PIR and the reaction is relatively fast.
Valter
Stockholm
Know this thread is old… just wanted to mention you can create virtual switches in SmartThings and expose them into eWeLink. That is the way that I ocassionally create them.
An iHost allows creating a virtual switch in node-red, as shown in @csongor.varga 's YouTube video.
This then comes across in a Matter bridge to Smartthings. The only problem is, for me at least, it seems to cause the Matter bridge to crash out. Has anyone got this to work?
Hi
Yes, a virtual switch would be really useful. I am sure I have seen a video on generating a switch in node-red, but it was a couple of years old. However it did not work for me – the only devices that would work were/are temperature & humidity sensors and temperature sensors. The other issue is that the capabilities offered for a device do not change – I am fairly positive that ‘brightness’ and ‘colour’ are not much use to a switch?
While looking for answers I came across another video by Csongor which seems to agree there are only two working sensors.
Does this mean that virtual devices are being got rid of?
Have you got these working and then tried bridging by Matter to another platform?
I tried those that @csongor.varga shows but then it crashes my Matter bridge.
Can’t seem to identify if this is a problem of incompatible capabilities in Matter or simply that virtual switches are not really intended by Sonoff to be a usable feature.
Thanks for your quick reply! I had deleted them for the moment as I needed to have my Matter bridge running. This weekend I’ll recreate them and send to you by DM.
