BTICINO: Enhanced Binding for Testing (Heating Control, Automation, Door Entry, Dimmers)

Dear All,

I debugged and enhanced the Bticino Binding for my use in several categories,
as Heating Control, Automation, Door Entry, Dimmers.


  • added full control to single probes / zones
  • added full control for Main Control Unit


  • corrected OWN feedback which caused binding to crash
  • added virtual calculated position feedback based on the runtime of the shutter (has to be pre-configured in the cfg)
  • the virtual position feedback makes it possible to control the shutter via the HOMEKIT Binding
    (but please be aware that 0-100 % (open / closed) is reverted in Homekit

Door Entry:

  • added possibly to activate camera
  • added possibility to un-lock the door


  • added / corrected the dimmer feedback

You can find the binding jar and some relevant files at following link.
Bticino Binding for Testing

I would appreciate any feedback, suggestion or question.

Regards Reinhard


Hi! This binding works with 300x13e WiFi edition?

Can’t really give you a answer on that, as I don’t have a 300x13e Wifi,
only have Gateway F454 & Multimedia Touch Screen 4690 to test.

But the mayor requirement is that you have a OWN gateway F454 or F453AV which can supply the video jpeg.
If the Door Entry System is accessible there it should work for OpenHAB too.

If I understand the manual of the 300x13e Wifi correct it has no OWN (OpenWebNet … the Bticino Bus Protokoll) capability. So it will work only with a gateway with OpenHAB.

Dear Reinhard,

Thank you for this very interesting extension.

I have a Bticino installation containing:

  • one front door camera with a bell
  • a door locking system
  • a second security camera.
  • and a F454 IP gateway

Reading your extension, you are getting the video signal from the gateway using its IP address. In this case how could I get both video signals from my two cameras? Do you have an idea?

Thank you in advance for your help!

Dear Mike,

From my knowledge the gateway can only deliver one video signal by the time which could be activated
by an switch like

Switch Camera_Entrance {bticino=“if=default;who=6;what=0;where=4000”}

40 … door entry ?? not sure get it from a long search at the internet
00 … address

May you can try it with your camera, as I only have a front door camera to test

It could may look like this for your add. camera:
Switch Camera_Surveilance {bticino=“if=default;who=6;what=0;where=4001”}
for the sitemap:
Image url=“http://x.x.x.x/JPEGgrab.cgi” label=“active Camera” refresh=500

Regards Reinhard

Thank you Reinhard for your prompt reply! I will test it!

Hi Reinhard,
I would be interested in testing the modified binding but despite countless attempts I could not complete the installation.
Following the online guides, I have performed the following steps:

  • Uninstall the official bindings through PaperUI;
  • Copied the org.openhab.binding.bticino-1.11.jar file to the $openHAB-share\openhab2-addons directory;
  • chown openhab: openhab org.openhab.binding.bticino-1.11.jar

At this point the binding should be active but through the openhab console I find it installed but not active.

Using openhab-cli console
openhab> bundle:diag 213
openHAB BTicino Binding (213)

Status: Installed
Unsatisfied Requirements:
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="(osgi.wiring.package=org.openhab.core.binding)"
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="("
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="(osgi.wiring.package=org.openhab.core.items)"
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="(osgi.wiring.package=org.openhab.core.library.items)"
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="(osgi.wiring.package=org.openhab.core.library.types)"
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="(osgi.wiring.package=org.openhab.core.types)"
osgi.wiring.package; filter:="(osgi.wiring.package=org.openhab.model.item.binding)"
Declarative Services

Have you got any suggestion??



Hi Reinhard,
I solved the problem. When I uninstall bticino bindings via PaperUI, the 1.x compatibility layer will be uninstalled and so your modified binding does not work. I solved by installing the official bindings via PaperUI and removing it via the console.
Now the modified binding is active.
Unfortunately I have a problem with some of the WHERE addresses.

In the log file I’ve found many error like this one:
2018-03-12 13:28:48.488 [ERROR] [nding.bticino.internal.BticinoDevice] - Gateway [MH200N], Error processing receiveCommand '[For input string: "64#4#01"

It seems that your mod bindings don’t recognize the “where” on a local bus.
If you upload the source code of the binding I will try to resolve this issue.



Hi Giovanni,

The error describes that the OWN Command can’t be interpreted in general.
Should not be an result of my additions, as I didn’t changed the principal code.
Anyway some weird Bticino code. Some idea for what it stand? Is it local bus?
If it is, the basic binding is not supporting it by now.
May you can activate the debug to get more detailed logging.

The source code you can find on GitHub.

Regards Reinhard

Hi Giovanni,

I found it in my OWN documentation. It’s a local bus address.
adress 64
group 4
interface 01
I am right?

Sorry local bus addresses are actually not supported in the binding.

Yes, it’s a local bus address.
If I use the standard binding I can control all light and shutter (who=1,2) and only a little part of termoregulation (who=4) with main and local address. Sadly the monitor don’t work so I can’t have the states of items and I can only read the temperature.
With your addition I lost the control of the local address but the monitor works well on all bus (main and local).
Today I will some test with a debug log and if I find something I will prompt to you.
Regards Giovanni

Hi Giovanni,

Got it, I guess I already knew what is the issue.
I added a int variable for the address (where) for my new part of the roller shutter functionality
which make trouble when the where is not only a simple number.

You will find an update jar under following link.

The only limitation should be now that the Rollershutter positioning with % Setpoint is not working on local bus addresses.

Regards Reinhard

Hi Reinhard, thank you for the fast reply. I will test the binding tomorrow.
Regards Giovanni.

Hi Giovanni,

May you download the binding again.
I updated the binding. Theoretically now also the local addresses should work for the roller shutter positioning.

Regards Reinhard

It seems that thats heating, light and temperature control works fine (on my Test system).

When it is planned to take it in the official binding?

bg patrick

Hi Reinhard,
Your binding works fine (my tests : lights, rollershutter and video door entry)
It’s possible to add a WHO=25 in your binding ? (CEN+)
This binding integrate a WHO=25 and WHO=25 works fine. Link :

Best regards


Hi Arnaud,

not an issue in principal. Do you have the source code for this addition?
If not I can try to decompile the java class.

But first I would soon approach the maintainer of the plugin to add my additions to the official distribution, as I have quite a good response from the community.

Then as a next step I can add the CEN ++ functionality, so I do not mess up the actual process.

Regards Reinhard

Hi Reinhard,
Thanks for your reply.
The source code is here :
Julesbike is autor for the biding with the WHO=25
Link for the github :

Best regards


Hi Reinhard,
When i pressed the button for the door lock on the videophone, the status for the door lock in events logs on openhab is not present.
I’m create a rules for the door lock and a light.
When i pressed for the button in openhab, it’s work fine, but whan i pressed the button in my videophone it’snt work.

rule “Portail1”
Item Portail_1 received command ON
sendCommand(Centre_1, ON)
sendCommand(Centre_1, OFF)


Hi Arnaud,

unfortunately the functionality to unlock the door is not well documented by Bticino,
It was quite a hack to get the command to be working.
Additionally there is a lot of feedback on the Bticino bus after you press the i.e. the door lock on the videophone, or even actually when you activate the door lock by OpenHAB.

I will need some more time to investigate this, therefore actually only the possibility to open the lock from OpenHAB is implemented. No feedback by now. So your rule can’t be working.

But it’s on my bullet list. May take a while to get a fully working solution.

Regards Reinhard