best wireless alarms
- Thread starter k3v1n
- Start date
Sponsored Links
That is really a matter of does it do what you want it to.
Texecom richochet is good but doesnt have wireless smokes or bells or keypads at present so system is wired up to some degree.
What do you need the system to do?
Texecom richochet is good but doesnt have wireless smokes or bells or keypads at present so system is wired up to some degree.
What do you need the system to do?
The minimum is that the system has two way communication between panel and all sensors and bells / sirens etc.
Some systems use only one way communications and thus cannot poll sensors for their status at the time the alarm is being set. Some one way alarms can be set with protective doors open, one system was set without any warning to the user even though one door sensor had been removed from site.
Despite what some supporters of wireless claim all wireless communications can be jammed or blocked. All DIY systems use a licence exempt radio frequency and a condition of the licence exemption is that the equipment must tolerate interference from other equipment using the same licence exempt frequency.
The way the system handles blocked communication is important to the over all security of the system. Some will sound the siren if the blocking is prolonged. For some systems sound the siren is the only way the system can indicate that the system is being blocked. This can be seen as a false alarm. The siren is sounding but no break in has happened, it can happen even if the alarm has not been set.
It might be interference from a nearby system, heating controllers, lighting controllers use the same radio frequencies or it may be intentional blocking to disable the system. One manufacturer of DIY alarms recommends turning off the jamming detection if there are too many false alarms. This would leave the system insecure as intentional jamming to disable the alarm would then go un-noticed and the sensors could not trigger an alarm.
Some systems use only one way communications and thus cannot poll sensors for their status at the time the alarm is being set. Some one way alarms can be set with protective doors open, one system was set without any warning to the user even though one door sensor had been removed from site.
Despite what some supporters of wireless claim all wireless communications can be jammed or blocked. All DIY systems use a licence exempt radio frequency and a condition of the licence exemption is that the equipment must tolerate interference from other equipment using the same licence exempt frequency.
The way the system handles blocked communication is important to the over all security of the system. Some will sound the siren if the blocking is prolonged. For some systems sound the siren is the only way the system can indicate that the system is being blocked. This can be seen as a false alarm. The siren is sounding but no break in has happened, it can happen even if the alarm has not been set.
It might be interference from a nearby system, heating controllers, lighting controllers use the same radio frequencies or it may be intentional blocking to disable the system. One manufacturer of DIY alarms recommends turning off the jamming detection if there are too many false alarms. This would leave the system insecure as intentional jamming to disable the alarm would then go un-noticed and the sensors could not trigger an alarm.
Sponsored Links
it's interesting that you mention heating controllers.
Texecom have for some time suggested that the honeywell wireless heating controller is known to interfere with ricochet.
However I have several installations both MT1 and MT2 with CM921 and CM927 honeywell wireless heating controls and there is no jamming issues. The wireless heating controls have been installed both before and after the original wireless intruder alarm system.
Its true that the heating controls use the same frequency range as the wireless intruder system, 868 ish, however both systems are supposed to look for the clearest channel to minimise interference.
Also had reports that wireless routers different frequency to the alarm system, dualcoms and other devices also interfere with radio devices.
The truth is as it transpires is the proximity of any radio/ wireless devices to the wireless expander itself and the close overlap of strong signal near the expander causes the jamming.
its not saying that some sources cant cause jamming issues, however in my experience and in most cases these are usually down to location of the wireless expanders relative to other devices wireless expanders.
Similar prox readers that read tags, can be interfered with when in close proximity to other readers or wireless expanders etc as the close proximity is the problem rather than the frequency itslef and stops the tag from being read.
Most decent alarm systems can report jamming issues, so you know you have an issue.
In general terms if you are concerned about jamming have a hybrid system where some devices are wireless and others hardwired.
Some of my customers are concerned so much about issue like jamming, that where possible the most critical break in points are covered by hard wired pirs and the less important/ harder to break in points are covered by wireless at there request.
Food for thought I suspect.
Texecom have for some time suggested that the honeywell wireless heating controller is known to interfere with ricochet.
However I have several installations both MT1 and MT2 with CM921 and CM927 honeywell wireless heating controls and there is no jamming issues. The wireless heating controls have been installed both before and after the original wireless intruder alarm system.
Its true that the heating controls use the same frequency range as the wireless intruder system, 868 ish, however both systems are supposed to look for the clearest channel to minimise interference.
Also had reports that wireless routers different frequency to the alarm system, dualcoms and other devices also interfere with radio devices.
The truth is as it transpires is the proximity of any radio/ wireless devices to the wireless expander itself and the close overlap of strong signal near the expander causes the jamming.
its not saying that some sources cant cause jamming issues, however in my experience and in most cases these are usually down to location of the wireless expanders relative to other devices wireless expanders.
Similar prox readers that read tags, can be interfered with when in close proximity to other readers or wireless expanders etc as the close proximity is the problem rather than the frequency itslef and stops the tag from being read.
Most decent alarm systems can report jamming issues, so you know you have an issue.
In general terms if you are concerned about jamming have a hybrid system where some devices are wireless and others hardwired.
Some of my customers are concerned so much about issue like jamming, that where possible the most critical break in points are covered by hard wired pirs and the less important/ harder to break in points are covered by wireless at there request.
Food for thought I suspect.
433.92 MHz is the most common. 868.xx is not yet very common.
On 433.92 MHz there is only one channel. A good system will monitor the channel and if it is busy then wait until it is clear before transmitting. Or it will transmit and wait for acknowlement. If does not receive an acknowledgement then it will repeat the transmission.
Sidebands and other spurious emmissions are responsible for this effect. Spurious emissions come not only from the radio transmitter but also from the switched mode power supply and other parts of the routers electronics.
fair enough but UK intruder panels are 868 not 433 if you are running to current standards?
lots of potential interference from my experience can be eliminated simply by proximity of devices emitting/ receiving certain frequencies.
Its a bit like the more crowded the room, the more likely you are to bum into someone and make them spill there drink. The smaller the room your in the more crowded it is and so on.
How many people have had unresolvable interference issue with wireless intruder alarms out of interest?
May be that should be a different thread.
lots of potential interference from my experience can be eliminated simply by proximity of devices emitting/ receiving certain frequencies.
Its a bit like the more crowded the room, the more likely you are to bum into someone and make them spill there drink. The smaller the room your in the more crowded it is and so on.
How many people have had unresolvable interference issue with wireless intruder alarms out of interest?
May be that should be a different thread.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
