Apollo Xpander

[GregC]

Having used a few of these from complete systems to additions to exsisting I have mixed feelings as to their performance.

We seem to suffer from intermitent faults where a device thats in and working with a good signal drops off the system, it then needs to be resited before it will register again, the signal strength is also a bit unpredictable.

I just wonderd if anyone else has had issues, it may be we just got a friday afternoon batch of equipment on one job as it works extremely well at other sites (using same CIE etc on all sites)

[wozzer38]

If it works well on some sites and not on others that would suggest to me that there is something on-site or in the environment influencing the problems. I know it would be difficult but perhaps changing devices working well for ones with problems will prove site over product.

[GregC]

I know where your comming from regarding the site enviroment etc but bearing in mind the site had been radio surveyed with Apollos survey kit and there were no "dead" areas.

I was more looking for people that had experienced similar querks with the system.

[Wiz]

Interested to hear about this problem Greg. Have you discussed it with Apollo? If not, ask for Andy Haynes in technical. I call him The Oracle  'cos he knows everything!

[GregC]

Wiz, we have and they are none the wiser, there is more to it than I have posted just wanted to get a bit of feedback form people that have used it as well.

[wozzer38]

This is the problem of 'wireless' systems in general, especially when used as 'life safety' systems. I would trust a piece of cable connection anyday over a 'wireless' connection. It doesn't seem to matter what clever communications these things use problems are inherent. My conclusion is although the 'wireless' product is very useful for solving some problems where cabling is difficult I would always use cabled devices where i can. Use the 'wireless' product sparingly. On the XPander product which i have used I have had a fairly good experience, what i would say is always go OTT on interfaces, don't try and scrimp by fitting devices too far away and trying to get too many devices onto each interface. More interfaces in this case is better.

[Allen Higginson]

This is the problem of 'wireless' systems in general, especially when used as 'life safety' systems. I would trust a piece of cable connection anyday over a 'wireless' connection. It doesn't seem to matter what clever communications these things use problems are inherent. My conclusion is although the 'wireless' product is very useful for solving some problems where cabling is difficult I would always use cabled devices where i can. Use the 'wireless' product sparingly. On the XPander product which i have used I have had a fairly good experience, what i would say is always go OTT on interfaces, don't try and scrimp by fitting devices too far away and trying to get too many devices onto each interface. More interfaces in this case is better.

New(-ish) technology always gets a cool reception and treated with suspicion.Any system is only as good as each component part and the fact that it is hard wired is no guarantee on reliability.
As a rule we don't use radio technology unless requested (even though we have our own product) but it is still a viable solution where hard wiring is not a realistic option.

[Benzerari]

My concern with wireless stuff is; say a survey proved more than 70% of signal strength.

1. Would that be the only requirement to start the first fix in that proved area?

2. How can you tell there are no other interferences around?

3. How can you tell if the signal strength detected at time 'T' would be the same 24/7?

4. How can you tell if interferences have minor effects at time ‘T’, they will remain minor for 24/7?

[David Rooney]

My concern with wireless stuff is; say a survey proved more than 70% of signal strength.

1. Would that be the only requirement to start the first fix in that proved area?

2. How can you tell there are no other interferences around?

3. How can you tell if the signal strength detected at time 'T' would be the same 24/7?

4. How can you tell if interferences have minor effects at time ‘T’, they will remain minor for 24/7?

1. yes... if the survey kit is telling you the strengths are ok then what is there to stop you.....??

2. You can't.... If its a new build you can expect signals to change with plasterboard going up, ducting and services going in etc.... and it'd very hard to take these things into account.

3. You can't.... we've had signal strengths effected by scaffolding around the outsides of buildings and basements effected by cars parking on roads above....

4. Not sure what is a "minor" effect is... the above scenarios may prevent signals call in signals from being seen by an EMS panel within the two hour window however a fire signal would be seen. EN54 systems are different and I don't know how they would react.... good question...!!

[Benzerari]

My concern with wireless stuff is; say a survey proved more than 70% of signal strength.

1. Would that be the only requirement to start the first fix in that proved area?

2. How can you tell there are no other interferences around?

3. How can you tell if the signal strength detected at time 'T' would be the same 24/7?

4. How can you tell if interferences have minor effects at time ‘T’, they will remain minor for 24/7?

1. yes... if the survey kit is telling you the strengths are ok then what is there to stop you.....??

2. You can't.... If its a new build you can expect signals to change with plasterboard going up, ducting and services going in etc.... and it'd very hard to take these things into account.

3. You can't.... we've had signal strengths effected by scaffolding around the outsides of buildings and basements effected by cars parking on roads above....

4. Not sure what is a "minor" effect is... the above scenarios may prevent signals call in signals from being seen by an EMS panel within the two hour window however a fire signal would be seen. EN54 systems are different and I don't know how they would react.... good question...!!

Minor effect of interferences is; when interferences signals with signal frequencies very close to the system's frequency, but their signal strength is quite very low say 10-15% so they wouldn't effect the system's signal even they have very closer frequencies to the system's one… etc

However, these interferences are not quite constant..., they may vary with the time, this depends to their sources... etc, and practically, I doubt if the actual wireless systems design hardware, can monitor them and filter them  ... etc

[Davro]

I too have problems with this kit, sits fine one day then the next low signal, this is sitting on a dimension panel and at the time morley said they do not support this kit but now they do on their own morley zx panel. But one of the main problem i've got is when i put a detector in fire the only way i can reset it is by removing the batteries and starting over again. Not sure what i can do? Apollo say they have never had this problem. Also i have been told that advance fully support it so may change panel.

[Benzerari]

I too have problems with this kit, sits fine one day then the next low signal, this is sitting on a dimension panel and at the time morley said they do not support this kit but now they do on their own morley zx panel. But one of the main problem i've got is when i put a detector in fire the only way i can reset it is by removing the batteries and starting over again. Not sure what i can do? Apollo say they have never had this problem. Also i have been told that advance fully support it so may change panel.

It's rather wireless systems that behaves differently than hard wired ones, one day I had seen an EMS engineer using a Magnet, to put it close to an EMS sounder to stop it sounding, while all the rest stopped straight away when silencing the system and resetting it, there is no much can be done with the existing hardware design...!