YRL 226 Added to DB


I have added my XML for the YRL 226 smart lock with lever.

Here: https://www.cd-jackson.com/index.php/zwave/zwave-device-database/zwave-device-list/devicesummary/1076#documents

This is my first time doing so, if there is anything else I need to do please let me know. @chris is this available immediately or do I need to wait for a snapshot release to use the device? Thanks!

You meed to wait for him to push it to GitHub & then check for a snapshot build after that.

Here is where you would see the snapshot build.

He last updated GitHub 5 days ago.

This link says there are configuration parameters. Under “Management” is listed the official instructions for inclusion & exclusion too. Command classes are there too, I believe.

I am just learning too, & learning how to research this stuff. :wink:
Thank you for trying.

I will probably do a binding update this evening so it should be available late tonight (UK time) or tomorrow.

1 Like

@Bruce_Osborne thanks for pointing that out, I added the configurations and association group. Do I leave the command classes as is?

@chris what do you think? I believe the command classes are important, right?

You shouldn’t change the command classes. I assume they were generated by uploading the XML, so they will be correct. The channels may (or not) need to be edited, but as a starting point they should be ok.

I thought this looked like a generic “I don’t know which to choose”.


Here are the command classes for reference.

I am using the most recent snapshot, removed and re-added the YRL226 and now I am getting this error:

2019-08-22 16:30:10.432 [INFO ] [alization.ZWaveNodeInitStageAdvancer] - NODE 61: SECURITY_INC State=FAILED, Reason=GET_SCHEME

The device can be added, but it fails to add via secure inclusion and does not allow me to toggle the lock or update user codes. @chris Maybe something got updated in the configuration that is causing this? It was working fine with the xml I added manually a few weeks ago.

I don’t think so - secure inclusion is not related to the database.

Ill give it another try. But just to confirm, the lock code feature only works if the lock is added via secure inclusion?


Yes - locks must be securely included.

To be clear, this is up to the lock, but I’ve never come across a lock that would support the lock command class insecurely.