Re: Z-Wave RF range

[Joerg <notthisjoergsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Robert L Bass wrote:


[...]

>
> Considering the success of cordless phones, wireless LANs and so on, I'd say that the vast majority of homes are not like yours.
> Speaking of phones, if cordless phones don't "cope" well in your home do you condemn them all as unacceptable everywhere else?
>

No, that's different. People are used to phones conking out while
walking, they know that from their cell phones. But a button that's
glued to a wall and suddenly quits is considered "defective" in the eyes
of a non-technical consumer.

It's like with cars. A tire blow-out is considered as something that can
happen. An engine that quits is, nowadays, considered something that's
not supposed to happen.

>
>>Else there is going to be the usual rash
>>of unhappy customers like you have it
>>with X10...
>
>
> I don't have unhappy X10 customers.  I refuse to sell the stuff.
>

I can sure understand why. That's also why I wouldn't want to go into
the HA biz myself yet ;-)

>
>>Or in the case of contractors the post-install complaints which makes them turn their
>>backs on the technology if that festers.
>
>
> RF systems work quite well in most locations.  X10 festers.  From what I've learned so far from experienced users (that
> automatically excludes Mr. Houston who once admitted he has no experience at all with it), Z-Wave works remarkably well.  My home is
> large enough and spread out enough that it should provide a reasonable test platform for Z-Wave.  As soon as I install it I'll let
> you know how it's working.
>
>
>>>>You can end a phone conversation simply
>>>>by walking into the garage with the wireless
>>>>phone...
>>>
>>>
>>>My home is what I consider "medium large"
>>>-- 3,800 sf under air and almost 3,000 sf
>>>non-AC space.  I have two sets of wireless phones.  The business phones are from Sony.
>>>They work everywhere except out by the
>>>mailbox (50 feet from the front of the garage). My wife's personal line is another brand.  It
>>>works well in 3/4 of the house, poorly in the
>>>rest and not at all outside.
>>
>>Our house is about 3000sqft and the phones
>>we use are always pretty professional. None
>>of the cheap stuff. Right now AT&T, before
>>that it was Cincinnatti Microwave.
>
>
> Judging from what you've said so far I concur that your house is not a good home for RF based systems.  Since X10 is mostly a pile
> of $#%& that means you'd better stay away from Insteon, too.
>
>
>>>They have a nasty habit of letting end
>>>users beta test their products without
>>>telling them.
>>
>>Sounds like a large software company... ;-)
>
>
> I hear that.  :^)
>
>
>>>As you probably already know, I sell HA
>>>products.  After I test the stuff for a while
>>>I'll offer it for sale in my online store.  If you decide you'd like to test a few units
>>>let me know.  If they're problematic I'll
>>>take them back.
>>>
>>
>>Thanks for the offer but I'll wait a little. I am
>>pretty sure the range won't work where I live.
>
>
> No problem.  I'll let you know how it works for me anyway.
>

Yes, please let us all know.

>
>>>>Although it would still most likely be a
>>>>waste of time ;-)
>>>
>>>Perhaps.
>>
>>RF stuff out here is even more tough to
>>operate. We are right next to a runway
>>plus the Fedex freighter fly directly overhead
>>and radio in their approach. Even the TV
>>falls off the cliff sometimes.
>
>
> I'd be surprised if proximity of the airport is much of a problem. GA aircraft radios are not very powerful to begin with (usually
> less than 10 Watts) and signal strength falls off geometrically with distance.  If there's a NAVAID on the field you could be
> getting some fun signals but most are not in the same band as anything you're likely to use for HA.  ATIS, a continuously broadcast
> report of ground weather observations, should also be far from the frequency of your gear.
>
> I'm not sure what kind of power the ATC radio puts out, but you said runway rather than an airport so I wonder if perhaps you're
> referring to a small airfield.  Many (most?) of those are non-towered anyway.  Some only have UNICOM service which is operated very
> sporadically.  Some have nothing at all -- pilkots simply "self announce" before they maneuver in the area.
>

That's exactly how this airfield works. The runway lights are "keyed on"
by keying the mike 4-5 times. They do that right over our house and a 5W
transmitter packs a punch if it's only 250ft away :-(

>
>>>>About 35 miles east of Sacramento, CA.
>>>>Lots of houses here with foil-backed
>>>>wool. It is still widely used, like on our
>>>>roof six years ago. We have foil-backed
>>>>fiber under a Decra metal roof...
>>>
>>>Perhaps California is very different from
>>>Southern New England. In Florida we have
>>>concrete block walls and slab floors.
>>>Roofs are shingle, tile (like mine) or (rarely)
>>>metal.  Exterior walls are insulated but not
>>>very much.  Our walls are over a foot thick.
>>>The outside is concrete block with stucco.
>>>Inside that is a 2" insulated space and then
>>>sheetrock.
>>
>>Very different here. Two by fours, siding on
>>the outside, drywall inside and AL-backed
>>fiber inside, that's pretty much it. Our house
>>in Europe looked like a fortress in comparison.
>
>
> Every modern home I worked on in CT was insulated.  The usual treatment today is to install unfaced batts and then tack a layer of
> clear poly across the entire wall.  There are two reasons this is popular.  First, it's cheaper.  Second, it makes for an extremely
> vapor-tight barrier -- much better than paper or foile-backed batts which are open at every stud.  Aluminum backed wool is virtually
> unheard of though some folks still use paper-backed.
>

Until there is a fire. You might want to get out as fast as possible
when that stuff starts to burn. Remember the disaster at Duesseldorf
airport? I used to live close to it when that happened. The people in
there were killed by toxic fumes, not the fire.

>
>>I had a test generator from there.
>>Oh man... but it somehow worked.
>
>
> From Brazil?  What brand?
>

I don't remember if it was from Eudgert or another brand. It puzzled
people visiting my lab when they saw a front panel with all Portuguese
on there.

>
>>>Ours is glass wool with a sheet of
>>>plastic.  Attics down here are shallow
>>>since roofs are not built for snow load.
>>>There's almost no usable space up
>>>there, except in the middle 10' or so
>>>of each wing.
>>
>>Plastic backing wouldn't last more than
>>a couple years in our heat...
>
>
> I suspect you're wrong about that.  The plastic commonly called Visqueen is made from low density polyethelene, a type of
> thermoplastic with a melting temperature around 230ºF.  It doesn't break down from prolonged exposure to temperatures lower than its
> melt point.  Even in the SoCal desert attic temperatures never reach 230ºF unless there's a wildfire present and at that point you
> have more serious concerns than the vapor attic barrier.
>

In our house Visqueen was only used for the vapor barrier under the
cement bed that all floors have. But I can only tell you that in the
garage it crumpled wherever a wee bit stuck out. Ok, that's 35 years now
but I expect construction to last a lot longer than that. Aluminum does.

>
>>>>Then there is radiant heat. In our house
>>>>some <censored> before us has cut off
>>>>the pipes but it must have been marvelous:
>>>>There is a 2" concrete mud bed over all
>>>>the floors and lots of copper pipes in there.
>>>
>>>I redid the master bath in my CT home
>>>some years ago.  It had always been
>>>cold and I hate walking on cold tile in
>>>bare feet so I installed radiant floor heating.
>>>You're right.  It is wonderful!  In Florida I
>>>only need heat a few times a year but my
>>>wife (tropical girl that she is) needs heat
>>>any time the outside air is below about
>>>80ºF or so it seems.  :^)
>>
>>Hmm, mine does, too, even though she is
>>from Berlin/Germany where it's 0F or less
>>much of the winter.
>
>
> Heh, Angela occasionally asks me to take her on a drive up North during the winter so she can see what snow looks like up close.
> She's only seen it at a distance in the Alps during several trips to Europe.  I know her better than to ever do that.  She'd make me
> drive straight home the moment she fealt chilly air.  :^)
>
>
>>>Here we don't need insulation as much
>>>as physical strength to keep hurricanes
>>>and alligators out.
>>
>>Our here it's eartquakes and bears ;-)
>
>
> And idiot politicians who can't even act.
>

Arnold sure does a much better job than the one before, IMHO.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com