Add support for ThermoPro TP828B

[rbray89]

This device is similar enough to the ThermoPro TP829B that I was able to key off of the support implemented for it, but different enough that the existing encoder isn't working.

I have the following output with the first probe inserted, and the second unused, ending at 86F:

Temps:
Probe 1: Target=170, Actual=70's - 86
Probe 2: Target=165, Actual=None

rtl_433 -d rtl_tcp://radio-rtl-2.home:1234 -f 915M -F json -X "n=tp828b,m=FSK_PCM,s=102,l=102,r=2000,preamble=d2552dd4,bits>=100" | jq --unbuffered -r '.codes[0]'
rtl_433 version 23.11 (2023-11-28) inputs file rtl_tcp RTL-SDR SoapySDR

New defaults active, use "-Y classic -s 250k" if you need the old defaults

Use "-F log" if you want any messages, warnings, and errors in the console.
{154}772c2eceaa4f3eddeaa4d7b2d2d2d2d2d200000
{164}772c2eceaa4f3eddeaa4d7b2d2d2d2d2d20000000
{154}772c5d9d549e3eddeaa4d7b2d2d2d2d2d200000
{154}772c2f8eaa4f3eddeaa4d7e8d2d2d2d2d200000
{182}772c369d549e7dbbd549af61a5a5a5a5a4000000000000
{166}772c33ceaa4f3eddeaa4d703d2d2d2d2d200000000
{170}772c341eaa4f3eddf5526bcfe969696969000000000
{154}772c335eaa4f3eddeaa4d7ccd2d2d2d2d200000
{156}772c331eaa4f3eddeaa4d70dd2d2d2d2d200000
{169}772c35fd549e7dbbd549ae39a5a5a5a5a4000000000
{154}7716194eaa4f3eddeaa4d759d2d2d2d2d200000
{154}772c31deaa4f3eddeaa4d778d2d2d2d2d200000

Let me know if you need anything else.

[ProfBoc75]

Hi @rbray89

The data layout is not exactly the same,, here more data / more information (temp, target, unknown ) than tp829b which provides only temp from the 4 probes. Can you share more samples to confirm, please.

[rbray89]

@ProfBoc75

Here you are:

Temperatures in C:

<DATA>                                                <TARGET1/PROBE1> <TARGET2/PROBE2>
770ceddeaa1feeddeaa1fea0d2d2d2d2d20000000000 1/None   1/None
770ceddeaa20aeddeaa1fe43d2d2d2d2d2000000000  2/None   1/None
770ceddeaa215eddeaa1fef5d2d2d2d2d200000      3/None   1/None
770ceddeaa220eddeaa1fecad2d2d2d2d200000      4/None   1/None
770ceddeaa226eddeaa1fe03d2d2d2d2d200000      5/None   1/None
770ceddeaadaceddeaa1fef4d2d2d2d2d200000    300/None   1/None
770ceddeaadaceddeaa20a14d2d2d2d2d200000    300/None   2/None
770ceddeaadaceddeaa215add2d2d2d2d200000    300/None   3/None
770ceddeaadaceddeaa2202cd2e5a5a5a400000    300/None   4/None
770ceddeaadae76ef5511327e96969696900000    300/None   5/None

770cedd6086afeddeaadac2cd2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 104-121/None 300/None
770cedd6086afeddeaadac2cd2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 104-121/None 300/None
770cedd190daceddeaadac24d2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ -1-300/None 300/None
770cedd1f4daceddeaadac04d2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 0-300/None 300/None
770cedd1f41feeddeaadac50d2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 0-1/None 300/None
770cedd1f41feeddeaadac50d2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 300/None 300/None
770ceddeaadacedd190dac7ed2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 300/None -10-300/None
770ceddeaadacedd1eadacecd2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 300/None -1-300/None
770ceddeaadacedd1f4dac3ed2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 300/None 0-300/None
770ceddeaadacedd1f41fe41d2d2d2d2d200000 BBQ 300/None 0-1/None

770ceddeaadaceddeaadac8bd2d2d2d2d200000    300/None 300/None
770c302eaadaceddeaadacddd2d2d2d2d200000    300/27   300/None
770c320eaadaceddeaadac22d2d2d2d2d200000    300/30   300/None
770c32ceaadaceddeaadac50d2d2d2d5a400000    300/31   300/None
770c335eaadaceddeaadac04d2d2d2d2d200000    300/32   300/None
770c33aeaadaceddeaadacf2d2d2d2d2d200000    300/33   300/None
770ceddeaadac335eaadac4ad2d2d2d2d200000    300/None 300/32
770cdbbd55b5865dd55b5887a5a5a5a5a400000    300/None 300/31
770ceddeaadac323eaadac1dd2d2d2d2d200000    300/None 300/30
770ceddeaadac314eaadacbad2d2d2d2d200000    300/None 300/29
770ceddeaadac30feaadacb3d2d2d2d2d200000    300/None 300/28

Note that the "BBQ" samples have a high and low set-point.

[rbray89]

@ProfBoc75 I think I may have gotten the format:

bitbench

Looks like it is just a series of Probe, target-low, target-high values, with an offset of 500 and a 10x scale applied.

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89

You shared the wrong bitbench with the 4 probes / TP829B, but I understand, and it's the same approach offset and scale as for the TP829B.

TP828B (2 probes) : ID {16} , 6 x Temp values {12}, Checksum {8}, 0xd2d2d2d2d2, and trailed zeros ...
TP829B (4 probes) : ID {16} , 4 x Temp values {12}, Checksum {8}, 0xd2d2d2d2d2, and trailed zeros ...

Now I'm thinking how to update the current decoder to add this model, I will add some checks around checksum and 0xd2 value position to get the model and then decode properly the values.

The ID ( 2 bytes) is also another possibility, but we need more feedback from other users to compare models and confirm that the model could be identify at ID level, for example, 0x08 = tp829b and 0x77 = tp828w ??? My guess, without other samples, we can't conclude.

Edit: ID is 1 byte, I forgot to update the decoder data layout, the second byte is used for display unit (MSB nibble 0x2 for F, 0x0 for C) , LSB nibble is unknown and show as flags, could be 0xC for tp828b, and 0xF for tp829b ?

[ProfBoc75]

Notice that the checksum is not exactly the same key and final XOR:

Done with g 98 k 16 final XOR ac using xor xor (100 %)
Time elapsed in s: 0.16 for: Galois BIT_REFLECT BYTE_REFLECT

It's gen 0x98, key 0x55 and final XOR 0x00 for TP829B

[rbray89]

@ProfBoc75 Oops, sorry: correct Bitbench

Neat, Thanks for the help!

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89 : FYI, I'm working to update the decoder.

In the meantime, can you please record few samples with the -S unknown option at the end of your command, please ? And for each you have a result, share few cu8 files here, (zip and paste here). Don't rename them, just give us some temp details aligned with the samples. This will let me replay and test the decoder.

Thx.

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89 : the PR is ready for test.

From my side it works only with the codes you shared.

I can't confirm that it will 100% work, I need your feedback for that, and/or if you can share some cu8 files as explained into my previous msg.

Thx.

[rbray89]

Probe1: target: 300 probe: 16-17C
Probe2: target: 1-300 Probe: None

Probe1: target: 74 probe: None
Probe2: target: 66 probe: 18
cu8 samples.zip

Awesome! Thanks again!

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89 , thanks for the samples, only g001 & g003 contain thermopro information, and for g003 I cropped the beginning to get the figures, both gave me the same values:

To share the good cu8 files, just replay them like this:

rtl_433 -X "n=tp828b,m=FSK_PCM,s=102,l=102,r=2000,preamble=d2552dd4,bits>=100" g001_915M_1000k.cu8

if you have an answer, like above, it can be shared, do it for each cu8 file.

I'm busy, so I will update my decoder later as @zuckschwerdt shared some advices to improve / simplify it.

[rbray89]

Ah I still had the fsk decoder in there, so I don't think the samples had any useful data...
Attempt #2:
samples.zip
I cycled through the various preset functions for each probe, starting with probe #1 then moving to probe #2, then cycling, and then finally warming up the probe from 20's to mid 30's.

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89

Decoder is ready to merge. I reworked it to get 2 decoders but inside same file, easier to maintain.

some results with your last samples:

.../...

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89 merged into master rtl_433 , enjoy.

[ProfBoc75]

@rbray89 , can you please confirm that the master rtl_433 version is working properly as expected with your TP828B ?
If yes, you can close with comment this issue.
If not, let us know and we will still work on it with your support.

Thx.

[rbray89]

Looks like it's working! Thanks!