dhome Posted December 15, 2013 Posted December 15, 2013 Hi guys, I've read plenty of threads here stating that you shouldn't plug your PLM into an UPS because it will interfere with the powerline signal. Is there any way around this problem? I ask because I live in a house with a basement sump pump. One of our main concerns is that if we lose power, our battery backup sump pump won't work. I currently have several 2852-222 leak sensors down there in case the pump breaks when power is on or our well pipe breaks, but in a power outage, I'd lose communication with the sensors. Any idea to solve this problem, or have any of you faced something similar?
Brian H Posted December 15, 2013 Posted December 15, 2013 Does the Leak Sensors RF signal reach to the PLM directly? If it is being passed on by any power line devices. The PLM will still not see the water leak sensed signal. With power off.
dhome Posted December 15, 2013 Author Posted December 15, 2013 Does the Leak Sensors RF signal reach to the PLM directly?If it is being passed on by any power line devices. The PLM will still not see the water leak sensed signal. With power off. Thanks for the response Brian. Yes the leak sensors are close enough to communicate with the PLM directly (I disconnected my other devices just to confirm and I was still able to get a "wet-on" signal).
Teken Posted December 15, 2013 Posted December 15, 2013 What controller (program) are you using to monitor the leak sensor now? Teken . . .
dhome Posted December 16, 2013 Author Posted December 16, 2013 What controller (program) are you using to monitor the leak sensor now? Teken . . . I have an ISY 994i/ir Pro set up to send me a text if a leak is detected. I plan on having my router and ISY on an UPS (along with a computer and PoE port for my cameras), so sending the message shouldn't be a problem as long as the internet is up. I just need to find a way to get the signal from the leak sensors.
Teken Posted December 16, 2013 Posted December 16, 2013 What controller (program) are you using to monitor the leak sensor now? Teken . . . I have an ISY 994i/ir Pro set up to send me a text if a leak is detected. I plan on having my router and ISY on an UPS (along with a computer and PoE port for my cameras), so sending the message shouldn't be a problem as long as the internet is up. I just need to find a way to get the signal from the leak sensors. I have read a small number of users have placed the PLM on the end of a FilterLinc. While the other end is attached to the UPS. This causes the PLM to send and receive via RF only. This may allow you to accomplish having the PLM backed up and powered. My personal experience is that the PLM's RF strength varies a great deal. I personally would not have my system configured this way because there is just too much risk. The whole Insteon dual band technology is still work in progress in my mind. If you're interested in another method to monitor your sump pump via Wi-fi outside of the Insteon environment I can provide you another option. Teken . . .
dhome Posted December 16, 2013 Author Posted December 16, 2013 What controller (program) are you using to monitor the leak sensor now? Teken . . . I have an ISY 994i/ir Pro set up to send me a text if a leak is detected. I plan on having my router and ISY on an UPS (along with a computer and PoE port for my cameras), so sending the message shouldn't be a problem as long as the internet is up. I just need to find a way to get the signal from the leak sensors. I have read a small number of users have placed the PLM on the end of a FilterLinc. While the other end is attached to the UPS. This causes the PLM to send and receive via RF only. This may allow you to accomplish having the PLM backed up and powered. My personal experience is that the PLM's RF strength varies a great deal. I personally would not have my system configured this way because there is just too much risk. The whole Insteon dual band technology is still work in progress in my mind. If you're interested in another method to monitor your sump pump via Wi-fi outside of the Insteon environment I can provide you another option. Teken . . . Thanks for the response Teken. I agree, relying on RF only for the PLM might be more risk than it's worth. I'm open to other suggestions, so I'd like to hear about your alternative option. Thanks!
shannong Posted December 16, 2013 Posted December 16, 2013 I was also brainstorming this to address a similar scenario with leak detection. There is now a Zwave module that can be added to your ISY, although in beta still. Then you could use a Zwave leak sensor for this purpose. All your other house stuff would still be Insteon using the dual-band PLM that doesn't need to be plugged into a UPS. Make sure you're using the external power supply connected to a UPS rather than power off the serial connector from the PLM. Probably the easiest route without complexity IMO and not affecting your current setup. Of course to get the notification you'll need connectivity to the outside world which means maintaining external connectivity via a hard wired phone line, GSM gateway, or your internet modem-and/or-router and all components would need to be on a battery backup as well.
shannong Posted December 16, 2013 Posted December 16, 2013 One other thought. There are wireless water sensors for security systems. You could use your security system for this and be notified that way. Most security systems are built with their own battery backup. They usually also monitor battery life and provide low battery alerts for wireless sensors. If you're security system is integrated with the ISY (or could be) then you could use a wireless water sensor with the security system and still let the alert and notification flow through your ISY. I'm planning to integrate an Elk M1, although they don't make a wireless water sensor that I've seen. However, you can add a module to it to support GE wireless sensors, and GE makes makes a wireless water sensor among many others. I haven't installed my Elk M1 so do your due diligence.
dhome Posted December 17, 2013 Author Posted December 17, 2013 One other thought. There are wireless water sensors for security systems. You could use your security system for this and be notified that way. Most security systems are built with their own battery backup. They usually also monitor battery life and provide low battery alerts for wireless sensors. If you're security system is integrated with the ISY (or could be) then you could use a wireless water sensor with the security system and still let the alert and notification flow through your ISY. I'm planning to integrate an Elk M1, although they don't make a wireless water sensor that I've seen. However, you can add a module to it to support GE wireless sensors, and GE makes makes a wireless water sensor among many others. I haven't installed my Elk M1 so do your due diligence. Thanks for the response shannong, the zwave route is an interesting option. I'm in a somewhat similar boat as you. I'd like to add an ELK M1 for security in the future, but I'm currently still saving up for it (the cameras and smoke/leak sensors were a higher priority for me). So it appears I can either add zwave and have both insteon and zwave leak sensors or wait for my ELK and have both insteon and GE or Honeywell leak sensors (since I already have insteon ones).
larryllix Posted December 18, 2013 Posted December 18, 2013 I have no experience with Insteon as yet but perhaps a signal bridge technique would work. If signal bridges via powerline or RF technique work between phases why not between similar phases on different systems? The powerline signal bridge should just be a capacitor circuit that passes high or a particular frequency band from line to line. The Rf method using repeating devices (dual band) wouldn't care about phase relationship between the load and line side of a UPS/inverter. Another thought in logic is knowing your power is dead and cannot report to you via email or SMS. The house needs attention anyway if it persists too long. How to get notified without power is another thing. Too bad the PLM couldn't be backed up with a DC battery system. It would take some hardware hacking to diode-in a backup DC supply and not interfere with the AC connection. It would be easy to do with the ISY since it has an external walwart anyway. Just thinking out loud but the PLM DC input hack would probably be cheapest and easiest and run the whole thing (ISY,PLM,router,modem) off the UPS system. Of course the PLM would have to be plugged into the main house grid and rely on phase coupling or RF to get the wet alarm. Anybody know what internal voltage the PLM runs on?
Xathros Posted December 18, 2013 Posted December 18, 2013 I am no expert by any means but I really suspect a DC backup to the PLM would prove useless and as much of what the PLM does is track the AC sine wave for zero crossing transmit timing - with no AC input, how can it function at all? Put a dual band PLM behind a UPS alog with your ISY wallwart and network gear then put the UPS on a filterlinc alongside an access point to bridge over the UPS with RF. This works for a number of users here. -Xathros
ELA Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 I read this post a few weeks back and it peaked my interest. It seemed logical that the dual band PLM should be able to communicate via RF only, without an AC zero cross reference, since RF only devices communicate asynchronously. I ran a test to confirm what Xathros has said. Using a Triggerlinc I set up a link to communicate with a PLM. I then shorted the opto-coupler secondary pins so that the micro-controller no longer had a zero cross reference. One would expect the power line comms to cease of course, but why not keep RF only comms alive? The result was that the PLM would no longer pass the RF only messages up to the host without the zero cross reference present. I have read about a number of people forcing the PLM to communicate via RF only by isolating it with a filterlinc from the power line - non UPS related. Are there some here that are currently running a PLM on the output (inverter side) of a UPS to provide backup capability ( for RF only messaging) as well?
Xathros Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 Hi ELA- Thank you for verifying my suspicion. While it makes sense that a PLM "could" function for RF with no AC reference, I don't see SmartHome putting that much engineering into their products. I would guess that they are using the 60Hz line as the clock for both the power line and RF side of things. I do remember a few users having the PLM on the Battery side of a UPS and bridging via RF. I'll poke around and see if I can search out some of those older posts. -Xathros
Brian H Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 I have seen no exact data on this. Since the Insteon power line signal starts 800us before Zero Crossing. My suspicions are they use the Zero Crossing for timing.
ELA Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 The zero cross is surely used for a reference in the PLC communications. For timing outside of zero cross they would be relying on the micro-controllers clock. RF only devices can send at any given time since they do not have the zero cross reference. Therefore I would expect when the PLM receives a RF only message that it "could" pass that message up to the host (without a zero cross ref)- Given additional engineering. I liked the idea of a DC UPS ... too bad. The reason I was curious if there are some using a PLM on the output side of a UPS is wondering how well that works. Especially if it is not a "true Sine Wave" UPS. Most cheap household units are the "simulated sine" type that look more like a square wave. I picked up a used APC550 UPS for $5 that I captured the output waveform on and it was pretty nasty looking. It does at least provide the zero cross reference required. The PLM did pass the RF only message up to the host in my limited testing. Just not sure how well that might work long term and if there would be any additional wear and tear on the PLM circuitry over time. ( sorry about the different time scales)
Xathros Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 The PLM did pass the RF only message up to the host in my limited testing. Just not sure how well that might work long term and if there would be any additional wear and tear on the UPS circuitry over time. Why would this cause any issues for a UPS? Or, did you mean to say PLM here? -Xathros
larryllix Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 Why would this cause any issues for a UPS? Or, did you mean to say PLM here? -Xathros IMHO A "pure sinewave" inverter should be used for sensitive electronic equipment like a PLM. The waveforms displayed are from a "modified sinewave" inverter. I would be surprised the Insteon signals would work at all if they are zero-crossing dependant. Modified sinewave has that pause between polarity switches that may play havoc with timings and also be load nature dependant. At least the pure sinewave inverters have a few more steps in the wave and can be filtered a little better but than we have a signal absorption box for any powerline signals. Maybe we only expect RF to survive to dual band units in this situation?
Brian H Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 From the internal photos of the 2413S/U PLM and the V2 2443 Access Points {same main board}. On the FCC Database web site. They use a LNK354GN Off Line Switcher IC in its power supply. I am not sure how it would react to a modified sinewave. I would agree that the Zero Crossing Detector may have a problem with the modified sinewave waveform.
gatchel Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 In reading this thread I just want to say that using Insteon for any critical notification like water, smoke, fire, panic, medical, etc, etc, is not a good idea. You really need a hardwired solution or a proper wireless supervised solution to reliably accomplish this task.
ELA Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 Maybe we only expect RF to survive to dual band units in this situation? Not advocating anything, just exploration into an answer to the original question. Would never be intended to communicate via PLC when "on Battery", only to be able to capture asynchronous RF messages. When "on-line" it would still be mostly RF only due to signal sucker nature of most UPS's Surge/EMI front ends. A nearby DB or Access point device would do the synchronous translation back to PLC. The point proven was that the PLM requires a zero cross signal of some sort, even to receive an asynchronous RF signal. However it may not necessarily need be accurate, or in sync with, the power companies 60HZ in order to satisfy an asynchronous RF receive capability within the PLM.
larryllix Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 The point proven was that the PLM requires a zero cross signal of some sort, even to receive an asynchronous RF signal. However it may not necessarily need be accurate, or in sync with, the power companies 60HZ in order to satisfy an asynchronous RF receive capability within the PLM. So in ez1976's case he may be able to use the PLM with a stepdown transformer on 50Hz. It may only function on RF. OTOH: Didn't I read somewhere European Insteon modules using a different frequency for RF? Nothing like having a loose return policy.
Brian H Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 Yes the countries allowed RF frequency is different for other areas of the world. Even the old X10 RF devices had a different frequency allowed in Europe. Than in the USA and Canada. The Insteon modules also have the proper AC plug on them to match the local outlets.
larryllix Posted January 12, 2014 Posted January 12, 2014 I have seen no exact data on this.Since the Insteon power line signal starts 800us before Zero Crossing. My suspicions are they use the Zero Crossing for timing. And that must be based on a 60Hz assumption for the same reason no dates were on coins marked BC. Also based timing from the previous zero crossing it would put the signal right in the middle of the garbage from a modified sinewave zero noise and/or keep confusing the frequency with front end and back end zero-crossing timings. Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of modules?
Recommended Posts