Re: Ademco Wireless

["Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

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.

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.