OpenHAB as integration platform for BTicino and Shelly


I have an older BTicino MyHome automation system from 2008, which handles all our lights and shutters. Now I would like to extend this system with wireless components from Shelly, such as the Shelly Plus 1PM, the Shelly Plug S and the Shelly Button 1.

Ideally I would like the integration to go both ways - wired light switches from BTicino switching devices with the Plus 1PM and the Plug S, and the Shelly Button 1 being able to switch wired BTicino lights.

OpenHAB has bindings for both systems, and I wanted to ask the experts here if it is the right platform to integrate the two in the manner I described? Or in other words, can OpenHAB route commands between the two systems? And if yes, can anyone point me in the right direction for which documentation I should read for setting up such a routing?

Additionally I would also like to use OpenHAB then to add mobile app and voice assistant support to our system, but that is another story.

Thanks for your support!

Yes that would be possible.

First integrate both systems separately, so that you will have things and items available to control each device independent.

Second look at rules so that one action will trigger another action.

1 Like

I’m not an expert but I followed the same approach you are proposing with my Bticino MyHome system. Once integrated into OpenHAB, I have been able to build very complex scenarios, combining a lot of different technologies. This approach is definitely richer than just using the native features provided by the individual manufacturers. Moreover, you can also take advantage of the OpenHAB support for the voice assistants to control all your MyHome items. I’m using both Alexa and Google Home to control the MyHome system (or to trigger other OpenHAB rules) and I’m very satisfied with it.
Have fun! :slight_smile:

1 Like

Thanks! For BTicino that works so far, now I am waiting for my first ordered Shelly plugs to arrive.

If I want to control a Shelly plug from a BTicino switch, I would assume that I would have to create a “virtual” thing for that, meaning a thing that has an Open Web Net address (A/PL) but does not physically exist in the BTicino system. I could then use this address within BTicino, e.g. assign it to a physical light switch or activate it in a MH202 scenario. In openHAB I would then create rules that react to the “virtual” thing being switched on and that activate the Shelly plug.

Does that make sense?

I’m not familiar with bticino but why do you need a virtual thing that’s not existing physically?

I would create a bticino thing that’s linked to the physical switch that you want to use. Within openhab you can link an item to the things channel, so that you can see & control on/off state of your switch within openhab

Once your Shelly arrives you so the same with the Shelly device: 1. Install the binding 2. Create a thing that will represent the physical device you want to use 3. Link items to control & see status of your device

Technically, the BTicino thing is not linked to a physical switch or light but to an address being used in the BTicino system. Typically the address represents an actuator and can be used by one or more BTicino switches or programmed scenarios to trigger the actuator. But also multiple actuators could use the same address and then be triggered simultaneously.

That is why I was talking about a “virtual” thing, it would be an address in the BTicino system that is not assigned to any physical actuator but only used for triggering a rule in openHAB, which in turn would then switch the Shelly device.

From what I see in the BTicino/Open Web Net binding so far, I have two options for that “virtual” thing. Either a thing of type switch, which uses the A/PL addressing, or a CEN+ thing, which uses scenario addressing. I will test both options and see what works better.

Got my test setup working now: created two “things” of type “switch”, one for the BTicino system with the A/PL address, and one for the Shelly plug. Then created one “item” and linked the BTicino thing/channel with the default profile and the Shelly thing/channel with the follow profile. That way Shelly switches when the BTicino status changes, and I don’t even need to create rules for that. :grinning:

1 Like

… true, but that’s where the fun part starts. UI-rules are dead simple and if you want bring in more logic blockly would be my recommendation to start. It has helpful libraries from the marketplace (e.g. sending telegram messages) and is the best choice if you want to use your phone to edit rules. But you can choose from quite a variety of other languages, too

@the-ninth I see you are learning very fast to configure OH and the BTicino system. I also have seen your nice blog entries.
It would be great if you had time to wite a post using “from zero to hero”-style on how to setup OH to control a BTicino system. Given the instability of MyHomeServer1 nowdays I think many users will benefit from this kind of blog guide, and maybe then can also be translated to other languages, for example Italian

Yes, for sure when I am done with my openHAB setup, I’ll be writing a blog post about it again. :grinning:

Right now I am still struggling a bit with modelling it so that it works as I want, particularly for building a bridge between BTicino and other components controlled by openHAB, in my case Shelly plugs. I will post a question about this in the binding thread.

I am done now with the openHAB setup for our BTicino system and also its integration with a few new Shelly wireless components. I combined both into a blog post, see below. Any comments or suggestions are very welcome! :grinning: