Re: Ademco Wireless

["Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1115871619.903159.87820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Mark Leuck wrote:
> > "Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1115864031.051326.269130@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > > I don't install Ademco, but is there a way to note what the signal
> > > strength is  ..... like ..... on a scale of one to ten .... or some
> > > such range? or is it a go/no go check?
> > > If it's not a scaled type signal strength test, I don't know what
> to
> > > tell you except, talk to the manufacturers tech support.
> >
> > Not with Ademco, instead you have an option of reducing signal
> strength by
> > 50% for testing
>
> So if the signal is 50.1%, it's accepted. I guess that's ok. I shoot
> for a higher level with Napco. Instructions say a 3 out of 10 is
> acceptable, I hardly ever get a signal less 5 before adjustment. Then
> will always accept nothing less than a 6. I always carry an extra
> receiver but the biggest residential jobs have only ever needed two.
> Hard jobs in the past have taken me a full day to locate transmitters
> and receivers. However, I never/ever have a problem.

3 out of 10 to me isn't acceptable but Napco knows their sensors better than
I do

> Wireless is just as stable and reliable as wired, as far as I'm
> concerned. Has it's advantages too. Last week an office got hit with
> lightning. Damaged all kinds of other equipment and TV's and fried the
> alarm panel via the phone lines. Burned the paint off the box behind
> the board. Had two hardwired motion detectors all the rest was
> wireless. "Only" the wired alarm equipment had to be replaced. With the
> damage that occured to everything else in the building, I likely would
> have had to replace everything in the system, had it been all
> hardwired.

Yes that is an advantage many don't think of :)