dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1488
share rss forum feed


Paolo
Mr. Wireless

join:2004-05-29
canada

[Internet] pots splitter with monitored alarm sistem?

Just a quick question? What is the proper way to install a pots splitter with an alarm sistem? will the bell wire go into the line on the pots, then the red green goes to the filtered jack and the black yellow goes to the unfiltered "dsl"

where would i connect the RJ31x alarm to? the filtered line? or do i connect it before the input on the pots? i have getting mixed answers
--
Happiness is like peeing your pants... Everyone can see it, but only you can feel its Warmth!!


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5

You should be plugging an alarm filter in to the alarm jack, and use one of these:

»www.aartech.ca/ka431l01-excelsus···ack.html
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net



nm3gll

@bell.ca
reply to Paolo

LINE --->ALARM--->POTS SPLITTER. Alarm must be first so it is able to seize the line even if a phone is off the hook.


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5

said by nm3gll :

LINE --->ALARM--->POTS SPLITTER. Alarm must be first so it is able to seize the line even if a phone is off the hook.

If you do that, then the alarm isn't filtered, and will cause problems with the ADSL signal.

The compromise would be to place the POTS splitter before the alarm, and ensure the unfiltered jack is only ever used for the DSL modem. The alarm can then still seize the line ahead of all the rest of the phones in the house.

The best way is with the splitter shown above, as the alarm gets filtered, but still has the ability to seize the line ahead of the DSL modem and the phones in the house if it needs to dial out.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


Paolo
Mr. Wireless

join:2004-05-29
canada

i also am worried about da use of da alarm with out the filtered line. no one gives a clear anser but now i undestand putting an alarm rj31x into the filtered output of the pots splitter should work, no?
--
Happiness is like peeing your pants... Everyone can see it, but only you can feel its Warmth!!


ruggs

join:2012-03-26
Ontario
Reviews:
·Bell Sympatico
reply to Paolo

said by Paolo:

Just a quick question? What is the proper way to install a pots splitter with an alarm sistem? will the bell wire go into the line on the pots, then the red green goes to the filtered jack and the black yellow goes to the unfiltered "dsl"

where would i connect the RJ31x alarm to? the filtered line? or do i connect it before the input on the pots? i have getting mixed answers

The PROPPER way is line> alarm jack > Pots splitter

although this is not feasible for some locations, so in these instances you can obtain an alarm filter for your alarm and keep it "propperly wired"


Glen1
These Are The Good Ol' Days.
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-24
GTA Canada
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Bell Fibe
reply to Paolo

From a legal persepective the alarm has to be before the pots splitter. You might want to investigate a "dry loop" install for the DSL and leave the alarm system on your main line to prevent any problem.
--
My Canada includes Quebec.
Disclaimer: If I express an opinion, it is my own opinion, not that of Bell or its related companies.



coaxguy

join:2009-07-29
kudos:1
reply to Paolo

Never put the pots splitter before the alarm jack. Bell and any knowledgeable alarm company will tell you the same thing. Dial tone has to hit pins 4 & 5 before without any interruption, then pins 1 & 8 will feed into the pots splitter.


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5

said by coaxguy:

Never put the pots splitter before the alarm jack. Bell and any knowledgeable alarm company will tell you the same thing. Dial tone has to hit pins 4 & 5 before without any interruption, then pins 1 & 8 will feed into the pots splitter.

Sadly, depending on the vintage of the alarm panel, this may cause issues with the DSL signal. The only sure fire way is to use the Excelsus alarm filter that I linked to earlier.

The risk in filtering before the alarm and running a separate DSL modem jack is that someone could plug a phone in and leave it off hook, preventing the alarm panel from dialing out.

The same effect could be achieved by a would be intruder with a pair of diagonal cutters at the side of the house.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


Paolo
Mr. Wireless

join:2004-05-29
canada
reply to coaxguy

said by coaxguy:

Never put the pots splitter before the alarm jack. Bell and any knowledgeable alarm company will tell you the same thing. Dial tone has to hit pins 4 & 5 before without any interruption, then pins 1 & 8 will feed into the pots splitter.

Wouldn't that be the exact same situation as connecting a TELEPHONE to an UNFILTERED Bell Jack? The Alarm may not dial out correctly if there is high frequency DSL signal on the jack, the alarm is basically a modem, so if the line has noise on it from the unfiltered dsl, wouldn't it need to be "filtered" first so its a clean signal??

how would u like it if your house was being broken into and your alarm could not communicate to the central monitoring office due to the improper configuration?? you would be pissed at yourself. as for picking up an extention and causing your alarm to not dial out, i dont think that will happen if you wire it correctly, the filtered signal coming out of the pots splitter, goes into the rj31x jack, into the alarm, then out of the alarm into the punch block which goes to the rest of the house. so if the phone is off the hook, the alarm should disconnect the ISW and still be able to make the call, no?

why is everyones answer on here conflicting with one another? one guy says do this, one guy says do that.
--
Happiness is like peeing your pants... Everyone can see it, but only you can feel its Warmth!!


nm3gll

@bell.ca

There are 2 ways of wiring this. The right way and the wrong way. As I stated before, LINE --->ALARM --->POTS SPLITTER. If the line is needed by the alarm system, it seizes the line. In other words, it disconnects it from anything past it (including the modem). There would be no "high frequency DSL on the jack". Most alarms have no effect on DSL, but if yours is older and it is giving you a problem, then buy the Excelsus alarm filter. If you have the luxury of a 2nd line, you can always move the alarm to it. Keep it simple and avoid problems later.


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to Paolo

said by Paolo:


why is everyones answer on here conflicting with one another? one guy says do this, one guy says do that.

Simply put, there is a chance that if you wire it "correctly", your DSL may not work properly.

If you are careful, and you wire the DSL modem to the line before the alarm jack, and filter the alarm system, both the DSL and alarm will work properly - but it is technically "incorrect", as nothing is supposed to be before the alarm jack.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


coaxguy

join:2009-07-29
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Bell Fibe
·Start Communicat..
reply to Paolo

said by Paolo:

said by coaxguy:

Never put the pots splitter before the alarm jack. Bell and any knowledgeable alarm company will tell you the same thing. Dial tone has to hit pins 4 & 5 before without any interruption, then pins 1 & 8 will feed into the pots splitter.

Wouldn't that be the exact same situation as connecting a TELEPHONE to an UNFILTERED Bell Jack? The Alarm may not dial out correctly if there is high frequency DSL signal on the jack, the alarm is basically a modem, so if the line has noise on it from the unfiltered dsl, wouldn't it need to be "filtered" first so its a clean signal??

how would u like it if your house was being broken into and your alarm could not communicate to the central monitoring office due to the improper configuration?? you would be pissed at yourself. as for picking up an extention and causing your alarm to not dial out, i dont think that will happen if you wire it correctly, the filtered signal coming out of the pots splitter, goes into the rj31x jack, into the alarm, then out of the alarm into the punch block which goes to the rest of the house. so if the phone is off the hook, the alarm should disconnect the ISW and still be able to make the call, no?

why is everyones answer on here conflicting with one another? one guy says do this, one guy says do that.

I wouldn't like it at all, which is why I'm telling you, AS A BELL TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS FIELD TECH, that it should be LINE, ALARM, POTS SPLITTER.

The alarm will only affect the DSL if the alarm was in use and dialing out. If that we're the case, your Internet being down would be the least of your worries.

Also, there are no "conflicting" answers, everyone has told you this method except one person. Hardly conflicting.

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5

said by coaxguy:

The alarm will only affect the DSL if the alarm was in use and dialing out. If that we're the case, your Internet being down would be the least of your worries.

Except for the once a day "phone home" call the alarm does to check in with the monitoring company..., or the crappy sync because the alarm panel interferes with the DSL signal just like any unfiltered phone/fax/set top box.

Seriously, if you KNOW for certain there will be no phone plugged in to the dedicated DSL jack, there shouldn't be any harm in putting the POTS splitter before the alarm jack.

The problem of course is, once the installer leaves the house, there's no way to ensure that a phone doesn't get plugged in, and that the would be intruders don't know which phone to quickly run to and knock off the hook to make sure the alarm can't call out...
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net

urbang33k

join:2010-02-13
Canada
kudos:1
reply to Paolo

said by Paolo:

Wouldn't that be the exact same situation as connecting a TELEPHONE to an UNFILTERED Bell Jack? The Alarm may not dial out correctly if there is high frequency DSL signal on the jack, the alarm is basically a modem, so if the line has noise on it from the unfiltered dsl, wouldn't it need to be "filtered" first so its a clean signal??

how would u like it if your house was being broken into and your alarm could not communicate to the central monitoring office due to the improper configuration?? you would be pissed at yourself. as for picking up an extention and causing your alarm to not dial out, i dont think that will happen if you wire it correctly, the filtered signal coming out of the pots splitter, goes into the rj31x jack, into the alarm, then out of the alarm into the punch block which goes to the rest of the house. so if the phone is off the hook, the alarm should disconnect the ISW and still be able to make the call, no?

why is everyones answer on here conflicting with one another? one guy says do this, one guy says do that.

That wouldn't happen if the alarm jack is wired and functioning correctly. The alarm is supposed to act like a 'make or break' enterphone essentially. When the alarm needs to dial out, it disconnects ALL isw to dial. If the modem, being connected to the isw, is disconnected, there would be no high frequency dsl signal at that point.

Also, it's policy to wire it this way. It's also upto the customer to provide the special filter for the alarm system, if it so requires.

--
Opinions and ideas expressed in my post are my own and in no way represent those of Bell Canada Enterprises, Bell Canada, Bell TV, Bell Internet, Bell Mobility, Bell Technical Solutions, Expertech, or any other partners under the BCE umbrella.

HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5

This is basically an issue of responsibility, not of what produces the best result.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net



Ravioli

@bellmobilite.ca

I would put the alarm after the POTS, thats the proper way bell techs should do it, they know this as well, plugging your alarm into the raw bell line may not communicate with your alarm force company and will yeild in numberous complaints



coaxguy

join:2009-07-29
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Bell Fibe
·Start Communicat..

said by Ravioli :

I would put the alarm after the POTS, thats the proper way bell techs should do it, they know this as well, plugging your alarm into the raw bell line may not communicate with your alarm force company and will yeild in numberous complaints

No, thats not the proper way a Bell tech should do it, as I am a Bell tech, and im telling you the mandated way to install POTS+ALARM with DSL on the line is DIALTONE -> ALARM -> POTS SPLIT.

Your post doesn't even sound logical, why would the RJ31X jack being connected directly to the Bell drop cause the alarm not to communicate. When in fact its the other way around.

When you have the POTS splitter first, which removes a block of frequencies off the Bell drop that the DSL signal is carried on, this is what can cause issues with the communication of the alarm panel.

See this diagram on how it should be wired.




Glen1
These Are The Good Ol' Days.
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-24
GTA Canada
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Bell Fibe
reply to Paolo

I guess it goes back to the situation where you request a 'dry loop' from Bell for your DSL, not being charged for it, and keep your alarm on your main line thereby avoiding all the conflict that is inherent with an alarm causing DSL speed issues. There is a legal requirement for the alarm jack to be installed before the pots splitter...this is a known issue with Bell technicians. They have been instructed to install the alarm jack first.
--
My Canada includes Quebec.
Disclaimer: If I express an opinion, it is my own opinion, not that of Bell or its related companies.



xbell

@cgocable.net
reply to Paolo

I'll throw my 2 cents worth in as I have been doing this for over 30 years after working for Bell and now specializing in inside low voltage wiring.

It should be Line -> Alarm -> Pots splitter.

That said the alarm guys for the most part still use quad so your DSL signal sometimes travels across the house, and they often run it in with electrical, and back on untwisted pair back to your fancy cat. 3 or cat. 5-6 ISW to the modem.