Bi-directional amplifiers

[ofd8001]

From time to time it is necessary to improve radio communications in large buildings with equipment like bi-drectional amplifiers.

Does anyone have a ball-park idea on how much it costs to put one of these in?

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by ofd8001

From time to time it is necessary to improve radio communications in large buildings with equipment like bi-drectional amplifiers.

Does anyone have a ball-park idea on how much it costs to put one of these in?

Yes, but the ball-park varies in size from your local elementary school recess ball diamond up to the yet unfinished new Yankee stadium.

[mitaux8030]

Equipment costs for a reasonable quality device (I use Algon), about $500 plus feeders. Installation costs vary greatly.

[ofd8001]

Mitaux8030: Thanks!

N Jay: Who said anything about a baseball stadium - it's football season you know.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by ofd8001

Mitaux8030: Thanks!

N Jay: Who said anything about a baseball stadium - it's football season you know.

I don't know too many people that call a football stadium a "Ball Park".

That aside, you better plan on "Engineering and Installation" costs that make the Amp hardware costs seem like nothing.

[NeFire242]

Check out Tesco.com

[ofd8001]

Well . . . I guess you got a point there.

Here's the deal. I'm a fire chief in a community with a new radio system. I'm trying to get a law/code/regulation introduced that says "If you build a large new building made out of stuff that plays havoc with radio signals, then you gotta do something about it." The first question out of people's mouths will be "OK - how much is this going to cost?"

I ain't got no idea, but I think an answer to that question probably ought to be in my head. I don't think I'll get too far with the protective undergarment response: "Depends".

If I could say "Any where from $500 to $4,000" or "About 1/2 of a percent of construction cost", I might be a little more persuasive.

So if anyone can give me an idea of a range, I'd be appreciative.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by ofd8001

Well . . . I guess you got a point there.

Here's the deal. I'm a fire chief in a community with a new radio system. I'm trying to get a law/code/regulation introduced that says "If you build a large new building made out of stuff that plays havoc with radio signals, then you gotta do something about it." The first question out of people's mouths will be "OK - how much is this going to cost?"

I ain't got no idea, but I think an answer to that question probably ought to be in my head. I don't think I'll get too far with the protective undergarment response: "Depends".

If I could say "Any where from $500 to $4,000" or "About 1/2 of a percent of construction cost", I might be a little more persuasive.

So if anyone can give me an idea of a range, I'd be appreciative.

http://www.rfsolutions.com/

Call Jack.

[NeFire242]

Just make the ordinance, its up to the builder to meet the requirement, no matter what the costs is.

[mancow]

Why should the builder be responsible for the performance of the City's radio system?

[KS4VT]

Originally Posted by ofd8001

Well . . . I guess you got a point there.

Here's the deal. I'm a fire chief in a community with a new radio system. I'm trying to get a law/code/regulation introduced that says "If you build a large new building made out of stuff that plays havoc with radio signals, then you gotta do something about it." The first question out of people's mouths will be "OK - how much is this going to cost?"

I ain't got no idea, but I think an answer to that question probably ought to be in my head. I don't think I'll get too far with the protective undergarment response: "Depends".

If I could say "Any where from $500 to $4,000" or "About 1/2 of a percent of construction cost", I might be a little more persuasive.

So if anyone can give me an idea of a range, I'd be appreciative.

We have such an ordinance in place so if you like to see it PM me with your e-mail address.

[NeFire242]

34.14 Public Safety Radio Amplificalion Systems: (Towers)

34.14.1 General: Except as otherwise provided, no person shall maintain, own, erect,
construct, remodel, renovate, or provide an addition of more than twenty (20)
percent to, any building or structure or any part thereof or cause the same to
be done which fails to support adequate radio coverage for the Sarpy County
Radio Communications System (SCRCS), including but not limited to
emergency service workers, firefighters and police officers. Descriptively,
adequate coverage means the ability for SCRCS users to transmit into the
building an intelligible voice signal that may be heard; the ability to receive
an intelligible voice signal transmitted and originating from within the
building; and, the ability to transmit and receive intelligible voice signals
among users who are within the building. For purposes of this section,
adequate radio coverage shall include all of the following:

1) A minimum received signal strength in the building of one (1) micro volts
(-107 dBm) available in ninety (90) percent of the area of each floor when
transmitted from the SCRCS;

2) A minimum signal strength of one (1) micro volts (-107 dBm) received by
the SCRCS when transmitted from ninety (90) percent of the area of each
floor of the building;

3) The frequency range that must be supported shall be 806 MHz to 869 MHz;
and,

4) A ninety (90) percent reliability factor shall be required.
34.14.2 Testing Procedures: Initial Tests; It will be the building owner’s
responsibility to have the building tested to ensure that two-way coverage
on each floor of the building is a minimum of ninety (90) percent. At a
minimum, the test shall be conducted using a Motorola MTS 2000, or
equivalent portable radio, talking through the SCRCS. Radios may be
obtained for conduct of the tests from the Sarpy County Communications
Department (SCCD). The gain values of all amplifiers shall be measured
and the test measurement results shall be provided to the SCCD and kept
on file so that the measurements can be verified each year during the
annual tests. The SCCD will be informed of the schedule for such testing,
and, at its discretion may participate as an observer. A Certificate of
Occupancy shall not be issued to any structure if the building fails to
comply with this section.

Annual Tests; The building owner shall be
responsible to conduct annual tests. Such tests shall follow the guidance
outlined in paragraph 32.14.1 (General) and 32.14.2 (Initial Tests) above.

34.14.4

34.14.5

34.14.3 Amplification Systems Mowed Buildings and structures that cannot
support the required level of radio coverage shall be equipped with any of
the following in order to achieve the required adequate radio coverage: a
radiating cable system or an internal multiple antenna system with or
without FCC accepted bi-directional amplifiers as needed. If used, bidirectional
amplifiers shall include filters to reduce adjacent frequency
interference at least 35 dl3 below the National Public Safety Planning
Advisory Committee (NPSPAC) band. The filters shall be tuned to 825
MHz and to 870 MHz so that they will be 35 dB below the NPSPAC
frequencies of 824 MHz and 869 M E re spectively. Other settings may be
used provided that they do not attenuate the NPSPAC frequencies and
further provided that they are not more than one (1) MHz from the
NPSPAC frequencies. If any part of the installed system or systems
contains an electrically powered component, the system shall be capable of
operating on an independent battery and/or generator system for a period of
at least twelve (12) hours without external power input. The battery
system shall automatically charge in the presence of an external power
input.

Field Testing: SCCD personnel, after providing reasonable notice to the
owner or his representative, shall have the right to enter onto the property
to conduct field testing to be certain the required level of radio coverage is
present.

Exemptions: This section shall not apply to; buildings permitted in
residential districts; any building constructed of wood frame; any building
thirty five (35) feet high or less; as long as none of the aforementioned
buildings make use of any metal construction or any underground storage
or parking areas. For purposes of this section, parking structures and
stairwells are included in the definition of “building” and stair shafts are
included in the definition of “all parts of a building”, but elevators may be
excluded.

There's a good example. See no prices are mentioned, just specs. If you mention prices, then you are going to have to honor those or list when those expire, etc. Its better not to list any price and have them refer to a BDA manufacture or their local radio shop for additional details.

[NeFire242]

Originally Posted by mancow

Why should the builder be responsible for the performance of the City's radio system?

Because if a shoot out happens at your local Wal-Mart or big box store and their radio's honk at them you're probably going to be a little upset wondering why additional help or that squad hasn't come yet. Come on now, you know better than why.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by NeFire242

Just make the ordinance, its up to the builder to meet the requirement, no matter what the costs is.

Ah, maybe responsible government?

(Checking to make sure a rule is reasonable and does not cause overbearing costs)

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by NeFire242

Just make the ordinance, its up to the builder to meet the requirement, no matter what the costs is.

Hu?

Originally Posted by ofd8001

. . . The first question out of people's mouths will be "OK - how much is this going to cost?".

I think he was looking for info to help get the law passed, not to put a cost into the law.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by mancow

Why should the builder be responsible for the performance of the City's radio system?

Its about public safety officer "life safety".

[mancow]

Hu what?

The City/County/Local Govt. whoever... built the system. They City should make it robust enough to penetrate the buildings or install the BiDirectional repeater themselves. The tax payers already paid for the system once. Why should the building owner pay again? Anyway, I took us off topic so I will shut up now.

Originally Posted by N_Jay

Hu?




I think he was looking for info to help get the law passed, not to put a cost into the law.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by mancow

Hu what?

The City/County/Local Govt. whoever... built the system. They City should make it robust enough to penetrate the buildings or install the BiDirectional repeater themselves. The tax payers already paid for the system once. Why should the building owner pay again? Anyway, I took us off topic so I will shut up now.

Sorry, cut wrong post.

Fixed it.

[N_Jay]

Originally Posted by mancow

Hu what?

The City/County/Local Govt. whoever... built the system. They City should make it robust enough to penetrate the buildings or install the BiDirectional repeater themselves. The tax payers already paid for the system once. Why should the building owner pay again? Anyway, I took us off topic so I will shut up now.

So your thinking is they should overbuild the radio system (and we the tax payers should pay for it) to cover any possible new buildings for the foreseeable life of the system?
So you think THE TAX PAYERS (us) should pay for the bi-directional amplifier systems to fix problems created by the building?

Who pays for the water pumps if the building is too tall for the existing water system pressure?
Who pays for the traffic lights if the building causes significant intersections to be reworked?

Yes, it is a bit off topic, but if others don't mind, I think it is an important topic.

http://www.rfsolutions.com/codewp.pdf
http://www.rfsolutions.com/ords.htm
http://www.rfsolutions.com/model.pdf

P.S. This is not an advertisement, I am not associated with The Jack Daniel Company or RFSolutions.com.
However I do know and trust Jack.

[mancow]

Yea, I see what you mean and I see it both ways. Maybe it could be a shared cost.