Wireless switching

[Russell griffiths]

Has anybody used wireless light switches, looking for recommendations, or really stuff we should avoid. 

Or should we avoid the whole idea. 

I don’t want to work anything from a phone or an I pad, I just want to limit the amount of wire having to get from switches to lights. 

Cheers all. 

[Triassic]

+1

 

The outside work is nearing completion and then it’s inside for first fix electrics, so this is a topic of interest.

Edited July 28, 2019 by Triassic

[Jeremy Harris]

Yes, I've used two types, one I'd recommend and one I wouldn't (hence why we've used two types).  I first used the Byron/HomeEasy ones, and they were less than 100% reliable, even over a short distance.  I changed to the Quinetic ones from TLC (https://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Index/Wiring_Accessories_Menu_Index/Quinetic/index.html ) and found they work very well indeed.

[dpmiller]

Similarly was having issues with an old Byron one that had worked happily for years until someone locally got something new and wireless (jammed our weather station too...). Tried one of the chinesium Kinietic switches and it works a treat.

[MikeSharp01]

11 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

I changed to the Quinetic ones from TLC

Did you use their receivers or build your own using the chip set - can't recall which that is but I think I recall it being available. Or have I confused them with the MK version which I know is using a commercially available chip set.

[Jeremy Harris]

31 minutes ago, MikeSharp01 said:

Did you use their receivers or build your own using the chip set - can't recall which that is but I think I recall it being available. Or have I confused them with the MK version which I know is using a commercially available chip set.

 

 

I'm using the standard Quinetic receiver modules and they seem to be very reliable.  As @dpmiller says, the Byron/HomeEasy receivers are prone to being jammed by any other device transmitting on 433 MHz, because they use a very crude system, that just turns the transmitter on and off to send the signal (ASK).  Any other signal being transmitted around the same frequency blocks the receiver, it seems.  The Quinetic system seems to use frequency shift keying (FSK) and so is a lot more immune to interference.

 

The only slight down side with the Quinetic system are the noise from the switches (they do make a fairly loud click when pressed) and the fact that the receiver will always initialise after a power cut with the relay off, irrespective of the switch position.  I used the dimming switches to get around this.  They aren't advertised as working with the non-dimming receivers, but they do.  The dimming switches are push on, push off, when used with a non-dimming receiver, so don't have any off or on position.  This neatly gets around the ambiguity that can occur with switch positions with the normal switches after a power cut.

[MikeSharp01]

Having the receivers close to the switch is a pain as you need access to them for maintenance. We need to find more Joules from our key presses so we can use greater power and send more intelligent messages.

[Jeremy Harris]

1 minute ago, MikeSharp01 said:

Having the receivers close to the switch is a pain as you need access to them for maintenance. We need to find more Joules from our key presses so we can use greater power and send more intelligent messages.

 

I fitted the receivers up in the ceiling void, next to ceiling fitted lights, so they can be accessed fairly easily if need be.  The switches are just fixed to the walls some distance away.  The range seems to be pretty good.  We have four switches and two receivers, with the switches coded in pairs to the receivers to switch two sets of lights with two-way switching.  Pairing the switches and receivers is pretty easy, and something that only needs to be done once when setting things up.

[Onoff]

+1 for Quinetic. I too am using the dimmer switches with the non dimming receivers. For my bathroom, 1 gang of a two gang dimmer switch signals a dimming receiver for the main downlights. The other gang signals a non dimming receiver that does the feature LED lighting.

[Onoff]

You said you don't want "smart" but they do do WiFi compatible receivers too:

 

QURW01_Data_Sheet.pdf

 

 

[Pocster]

So the qubino make an audible click ? ; even DIN rail version ? - what about fibaro equivalents??

Edited July 28, 2019 by pocster

[Onoff]

Just now, pocster said:

So the wining make an audible click ? ; even DIN rail version ? - what about fibaro equivalents??

 

"wining"?

[Pocster]

Just now, Onoff said:

 

"wining"?

Bloody spell check !

[Jeremy Harris]

The Quinetic switches make a click, as they don't use batteries to power the transmitter, it's powered by a small generator that works from the movement of the switch.  I've not noticed any noise from the receivers in the ceiling, but they do use relays, so the slight noise from them might be masked by the click from the switch.

 

 

[PeterW]

Quinetic are good - about to buy a couple of the new outside lights to see how they work as they don’t need a receiver as it’s built into the unit. 

[Onoff]

1 hour ago, MikeSharp01 said:

Did you use their receivers or build your own using the chip set - can't recall which that is but I think I recall it being available. Or have I confused them with the MK version which I know is using a commercially available chip set.

 

Just to confuse things Quinetic do a version of switch that will fit an MK grid plate:

 

 

They do similar for Varilight Power Grid:

 

 

 

 

 

[Patrick]

What's the advantage?

I take it that anything that works most likely cost more than hiring an electrician to run a cable or even doing it yourself. Timesaving in installation?

Reliability wise it s probably a no brainer to use non-wireless, a.k.a. Standard switches.

what else is there.

I'm always very interested in alternative solutions but with this one I'm struggling to work out the benefits.

[Jeremy Harris]

I used wireless switches to change the way our kitchen/diner lights were switched, after the wiring had been completed and the house decorated.  They were an easy way to be able to change things without any disruption.

[Onoff]

12 minutes ago, Patrick said:

What's the advantage?

I take it that anything that works most likely cost more than hiring an electrician to run a cable or even doing it yourself. Timesaving in installation?

Reliability wise it s probably a no brainer to use non-wireless, a.k.a. Standard switches.

what else is there.

I'm always very interested in alternative solutions but with this one I'm struggling to work out the benefits.

 

Say you've a garage with power but no outside lighting. Fit a Quinetic light on the garage, powered from the garage. Fit the switch in the house by the back door looking down the garden...or next to the French doors or outside on the wall.

 

Lying in the bath wishing you could dim the lights...fit an IP rated switch...also put one IN the shower cubicle.

 

Got an existing switch and you wish you had another the other side of the room...

 

Made a mistake in positioning the existing switch...

 

List is endless.

Edited July 28, 2019 by Onoff

[joth]

Other possible benefits, but it all depends on preference:

• If you have lots of light circuits e.g. a hallway or large living area, you can group them and have a smaller number of buttons to select scenes rather than needing a "sound desk console" of 12 dimmer dials (or whatever).
• Scenes can control table lamps and so on, which can easily be relocated without involving an electrician
• Opens the possibility of automations (e.g. turns all lights off at bedtime, auto lights on/off when away, bring up low level lighting when going to the loo in the middle of the night, etc...)
• Control from you phone or voice assistant if you're into that
• Easier support for colour changing and tunable white temperature, if you're into that. (the latter is definitely the new cool hotness)

 

I'm dead set against using wireless light switches, but keep questioning that aversion.

If I did use wireless I'd favour something using z-wave as then you can mix and match switches, dimmers, and "smart bulbs" from different manufacturers in a single system. And crucially, you're not locked in when you come to add one more switch or lamp in future. Fabario does seem a top contender for z-wave lighting kit. 

I'd personally steer clear of proprietary wireless systems, rako lutron loxone creston etc etc

I'd strongly recommend avoiding anything that needs internet connection, and thus tend to avoid anything using WiFi as it's a reliability and latency nightmare and lighting is not something I'd leave at the whim of a cloud service to keep running. 

Edited July 28, 2019 by joth

[Onoff]

Apologies ref the video quality. This is an IP6* rated one by my bath:

 

This (again a video, click to play) is just a switch held against the wall:

 

 

[Onoff]

Old thread on the subject:

 

 

It would appear they do do a wider choice of finishes but maybe not in the UK:

 

 

[lizzie]

I have 2 that we fitted in bedrooms where we changed the handing on the doors but forgot to tell electrician so light switches ended up behind the doors so we fitted them on the other wall so they are as you walk in not having to reach behind a door for the switch. They work well enough. They are not on the computerised  lighting set up they are stand alone.

 

My main lighting in the rest of the house has wall controllers as well as app control.  Its part of auto lighting system though.  Very nice keypad switches programmed for different lighting scenes on different buttons/presses. 

[Pocster]

Z wave all the way ! . I prefer wired switches though - back to a din rail of fibaro/quibino switches . Then just wireless z wave to control them .

[oldkettle]

@Onoff

 

Thank you for the videos. The switches are loud though. Likely not worth replacing the pull cord with ?