External Antenna for HC2

[AutoFrank 372]

Hi @TRicky (and other forum users)

I understand that you have an external antennae

 

Could you indicate why and which one you used?

I also recall you saying that you have 2 HC2

How are these arranged, Are they separate or master/slave and again why, Is your setup too big for one HC2

 

I'm considering getting an external antennae and perhaps even a second HC2 to increase coverage and reach

 

Thanks

_f

[gobbli 10]

@AutoFranki have tried serverals external antennas. No antenna was so good as the original fibaro. As alternative you can use

Please login or register to see this link.

Edited April 29, 2017 by gobbli

[TRicky 84]

Hi @AutoFrank,

 

Yes I have 2 HC2’s and both with an big external antenna’s.

At that time my idea was that my Z –Wave coverage was way too little. So I bought a second HC-2 and 2 huge antenna’s. And also my main HC-2 was placed in a server cabinet made out of steel so a perfect cage of Faraday. So something had to be done.

Now the main HC-2 (The Master) is placed on the attic of my house and the second (The Slave) HC-2 is placed on the attic of my garage with a (85 m2) showroom behind it. So I need quite some coverage.

Next to that I have an garden shed about 100 meters behind the showroom where I also need coverage. That’s why I bought the antennas and the second HC-2.

 

To be honestly, I can’t say the second (Slave) HC-2 did improve my situation a lot but I still think (without any factual proof) that my larger antenna’s do make a positive difference.

The slave HC-2 just makes it more difficult to my whole system because I have to import devices.

I think my Main HC-2 could handle it all, by the Mesh-network.

 

The antenna’s I use are: Trans-data Omni Fiberglass Antenna’s, see attachment.

Please login or register to see this attachment.

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

2 hours ago, TRicky said:

Hi @AutoFrank,

 

Yes I have 2 HC2’s and both with an big external antenna’s.

At that time my idea was that my Z –Wave coverage was way too little. So I bought a second HC-2 and 2 huge antenna’s. And also my main HC-2 was placed in a server cabinet made out of steel so a perfect cage of Faraday. So something had to be done.

Now the main HC-2 (The Master) is placed on the attic of my house and the second (The Slave) HC-2 is placed on the attic of my garage with a (85 m2) showroom behind it. So I need quite some coverage.

Next to that I have an garden shed about 100 meters behind the showroom where I also need coverage. That’s why I bought the antennas and the second HC-2.

 

To be honestly, I can’t say the second (Slave) HC-2 did improve my situation a lot but I still think (without any factual proof) that my larger antenna’s do make a positive difference.

The slave HC-2 just makes it more difficult to my whole system because I have to import devices.

I think my Main HC-2 could handle it all, by the Mesh-network.

 

The antenna’s I use are: Trans-data Omni Fiberglass Antenna’s, see attachment.

Please login or register to see this attachment.

 

 @TRicky Thats interesting what you said re secondary controller.

I have a largesh  house I am in the process of doing, 750 sq M, two floors but not spead out.  I have  just prewired, being lined as we speak.

They have used lightweight concrete panels with steel stringers for second level flooring. The steel reinforcing is contained within each panel so not linked between panels.

I was thinking potentialy a second controller was the way to go but maybe I need to do some testing before I go that way. 

There is a large entrance area  with a 8 meter high atrium and possibly one controllers zwave will reach where needed with module  to module communication on the extremities

Is the secondry controller possibility more hassle than its worth.... but may be I wont have that choice.

Im guessing similar problems with any external devices with the same concrete system being used on exterior wall cladding.

I forgot to add, luckely timber framing is the norm here for internal walls so generally zwave strength hasnt been a problem in the other projects Ive been involved with.

 

Edited April 29, 2017 by Jamie mccrostie

[TRicky 84]

@Jamie mccrostie

 

I think you can do perfectly with only one HC-2 and do a Mesh reconfiguration quite often to get the best routing.

Next to that I think a better antenna also helps.

I don't experience any better results with the second HC-2, neither did my bank account

I reach modules at 100 meters distance (in open air)..... 

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

@TRicky yes I have a corrugated iron stable block 80M from house and still get 100 % operation of the devices in there.

Its more steel supported concrete panels Im worried about

[TRicky 84]

@Jamie mccrostie,

 

That's the strength of a Z-Wave Mesh network. Most modules are a repeater the same time.

That's how larger distances can be covered

[AutoFrank 372]

Thanks guys 

All (95%) my devices are powered but i'm not sure i'm getting that sort of mesh cohesion.

Our place isn't huge but it's all concrete and some stone at the front but I'm still having issues 

I'll need to look more closely at my setup 

 

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

19 minutes ago, AutoFrank said:

Thanks guys 

All (95%) my devices are powered but i'm not sure i'm getting that sort of mesh cohesion.

Our place isn't huge but it's all concrete and some stone at the front but I'm still having issues 

I'll need to look more closely at my setup 

 

 

Have you done some checking of signal strength re test lamps on modules. 

Do we think the inclusion option "NWI" makes any difference.

As I said I have never had reception problems but am preparing myself...

@AutoFrankSurely walking around the house and wakeing a PIR sensor and doing signal strength test will give you a good idea 

[AutoFrank 372]

4 minutes ago, Jamie mccrostie said:

 

Have you done some checking of signal strength re test lamps on modules. 

Do we think the inclusion option "NWI" makes any difference.

As I said I have never had reception problems but am preparing myself...

@AutoFrankSurely walking around the house and wakeing a PIR sensor and doing signal strength test will give you a good idea 

 

Thanks @Jamie mccrostie

Seems very hit or miss at the moment 

Existing devices are now good but adding new devices is like brain surgery

.. even something as simple are a ubs module on top of the hc2 box .. not sure why 

1 hour ago, TRicky said:

@Jamie mccrostie

 

I think you can do perfectly with only one HC-2 and do a Mesh reconfiguration quite often to get the best routing.

Next to that I think a better antenna also helps.

I don't experience any better results with the second HC-2, neither did my bank account

I reach modules at 100 meters distance (in open air)..... 

@TRicky

 

Is that a full mesh config ?

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

1 minute ago, AutoFrank said:

 

Thanks @Jamie mccrostie

Seems very hit or miss at the moment 

Existing devices are now good but adding new devices is like brain surgery

.. even something as simple are a ubs module on top of the hc2 box .. not sure why 

 

This is where once again a lack of a easy method for transfering between broken and replacment HC2s would save a heap of time and hassle.( to prove not  A HC2 hardware problem)

[TRicky 84]

@AutoFrank,

 

Nope, I only use mesh reconfiguration for single devices.

 

[AutoFrank 372]

10 hours ago, TRicky said:

@AutoFrank,

 

Nope, I only use mesh reconfiguration for single devices.

 

 

 

Thanks @TRicky

 

If I have a bad node/device - Do I mesh reconfigure it or a neighbor ?

Have you ever done a full zwave mesh reconfiguration >

[petergebruers 1,268]

Is it OK if I give my motivated opinion and explanation?

It's kind of a long story...

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

15 minutes ago, petergebruers said:

Is it OK if I give my motivated opinion and explanation?

It's kind of a long story...

 

We love long storys.....

[AutoFrank 372]

33 minutes ago, petergebruers said:

Is it OK if I give my motivated opinion and explanation?

It's kind of a long story...

 @petergebruers

 

Go for it 

[petergebruers 1,268]

Just now, Jamie mccrostie said:

 

We love long storys.....

 

OK. I'll start at the beginning.

Z-Wave supports 2 mechanisms to deliver a packet.

 

A) Routing. This is the oldest and most basic.

B) Explorer frames. This is kind of last resort mechanism. I think Z-Wave Plus mandates it, but the actual mechanism predates it.

 

Routing is often called mesh. I'll try to be as brief as possible.

• Do you know how internet routes messages? Or have some notion? Well, then forget what you know, this is different.
• Z-Wave nodes do not have a routing table. We call them routers, and they truly are, but they don't maintain a table of "what goes where".
• It's called "source based routing" and it was extensively used by IBM's token ring networks, until ethernet took over...
• If it doesn't use a routing table, than how does it work? It sends data to an available node, and that node forwards it to the next node, until it reaches the controller
• A node has list of "neighbors". When you reconfigure a particular device, that device attempts to talk to all possible 231 (230? I'm always confused) nodes. It keeps the result and also sends it to the controller.
• When a device sends a packet via a router, that router attaches its address to the packet.
• This can be repeated 4 times.
• When the packet arrives, the controller knows how the packet got there, because the route information that was attach. To reply, the controller only has to reverse that list! Clever, isn't it?

So let's assume you have this very basic network:

 

HC ----- Switch ----- Sensor

 

If the sensor is in range, direct communication will be used. But let's assume it is too far from the HC. You try to include it, but nothing happens. A clear indication of a range problem.

 

So you bring the sensor closer and include it without issues.

 

HC -- Sensor  --- Switch

 

Then you move the Sensor back, to its final destination:

 

HC ----- Switch ----- Sensor

 

It works! Magic!

 

Let's see what happened.

 

When you included the Sensor, it was close to the HC but also close to the relay.

 

    Sensor Neighbour List: "HC" and "Switch".

 

Next time it tries to send, it prefers the direct route, but it fails. Then it sees "Switch" is a neighbour, so it can expect it to forward a message. The "Switch" dutifully attaches (inserts) his own NodeID to the packet and forwards it to the HC. The HC looks at the packet and sees it has a route. It sends the acknowledge via that route. It is necessary to send the ACK packet to "Switch" because we already know "Sensor" is out of range.

 

Note: NWI enables you to include the sensor, although the HC is out of range. NWI only works if "Switch" also understands NWI though. Because NWI didn't always exist, some neighbours may dump the NWI request. So even when the data sheet of "Sensor" lists NWI, it may or may not work...

 

Are you with me?

Any questions so far?

Can you see why routing is to be avoided, if possible?

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

15 hours ago, petergebruers said:

OK. I'll start at the beginning.

 

So Peter to avoid routing is it best to try to include without NWI clicked first?

How else do you "avoid routing"?

[petergebruers 1,268]

17 minutes ago, Jamie mccrostie said:

 

So Peter to avoid routing is it best to try to include without NWI clicked first?

How else do you "avoid routing"?

 

A device tries a direct connection first and routing is a backup plan. So you don't have to do anything to influence it.

 

The only way to avoid routing is to make sure you are in range. So, try to find the optimal spot for your HC is one thing. Avoiding obstacles, metal cabinets or doors and other radio best practices is another one. If the area is large, or you have for example two buildings but too far apart (to bridge with Z-Wave devices), I think the best solution is to use two HC and two separate Z-Wave networks (use the gateway functionality of the HC2), but I've never tried that myself

 

If you don't use NWI and your device is far away this is what you do:

• Try to include it. It fails.
• Move the module closer. Try to include it. Assume it succeeds (otherwise, back up even more).
• Move the module to it's final destination, and hope that one router is sufficient to get a reliable link
• Go to mesh reconfiguration and send the command. Wake up the device if it's on batteries. Wait 10 - 20 seconds (about right for a network of 100 devices.)
• If communication was possible, HC2 says "neighbour list received".
• HC and device now have a route, and the device knows its new neighbours.

 

If you use NWI:

• Try to include it. The device broadcasts its information and contact is established, regardless if the device has a direct connection or not.
• As part of the inclusion, the mesh is reconfigured, so no need to do a manual reconfiguration.

The end result is the same. That NWI saves a lot of time and work... If you omit the neighbour update in the first scenario, you save some time but because you've moved the device, it may have suboptimal routing information... so that's not a fair comparison.

 

Because of the routing and of the routing update, don't be surprised that it can take a full 60 seconds to include a device. It depends on the size of the network and the firmware version of the device.

 

You can try it, if you can find a spot that doesn't have a direct connection. Also check the menu of your Fibaro device, it probably has a "range detector" that can tell you is a route is direct.

 

You may be surprised, however, that a device without direct range, and without having done a "mesh reconfigure" does seem to send data to your HC. It's possible (I think I've tested this for the first time on a FGMS-001). If you include a device close to the HC2 (close is 2 - 5 m)  and then move it out of range... what happens? You might conclude that you don't get any status updates because the device does not know it's neighbours and can't reach your HC2. But newer devices have an alternative mechanism: explorer frames. It's a kind of broadcast. The device tries to find a device, any device, that accepts an explorer frame. This will momentarily flood the network and eventually the HC2 will receive the message. The HC2 now has learned a new route, without manual "mesh reconfigure". The device gets an acknowledgement and now it knows how to reach the HC2. So the next time, if nothing changes, it doesn't have to use an explorer frame.

[Jamie mccrostie 82]

16 minutes ago, petergebruers said:

You may be surprised, however, that a device without direct range, and without having done a "mesh reconfigure" does seem to send data to your HC. It's possible (I think I've tested this for the first time on a FGMS-001). If you include a device close to the HC2 (close is 2 - 5 m)  and then move it out of range... what happens? You might conclude that you don't get any status updates because the device does not know it's neighbours and can't reach your HC2. But newer devices have an alternative mechanism: explorer frames. It's a kind of broadcast. The device tries to find a device, any device, that accepts an explorer frame. This will momentarily flood the network and eventually the HC2 will receive the message. The HC2 now has learned a new route, without manual "mesh reconfigure". The device gets an acknowledgement and now it knows how to reach the HC2. So the next time, if nothing changes, it doesn't have to use an explorer frame.

 

Yes Ive have done this and it worked fine, latest devices one switch 2 included beside HC2 then installed 80M from house in tin shed and FGMS 001 all works great, unbelivably.