One of the questions we occasionally get asked is “do you do a distance to leak water detection system”, the answer is “yes”. Our DMWD unit can have up to four zones and will display the measurement from the controller to the leak… so why don’t we recommend it for critical areas?
Whilst the principle of getting a distance to the leak sounds great, in practice the measurement given by ours and our competitors systems could be totally wrong or meaningless for one or more of the following reasons.
What other disadvantages are associated with installing a distance to leak water detection unit.
Over the years we have replaced a number of distance measuring systems not because the system wasn’t working, but because the controller was stuck on detecting an old leak in an unventilated area or a faulty cable. To overcome this, some manufacturers use a zonal distance to leak system where each detection cable has its own electronic monitoring unit allowing the controller to add the lengths together to determine the distance to the leak. Or to put it another way, an expensive over complicated zonal water detection system.
So, what do we recommend?
Distance measuring systems are good in applications such as stud wall voids, or between floor and ceiling voids, where the cable route can’t be changed, it’s not easy to see the leak and a hole will be needed to find the source of the leak. But for critical areas such as server rooms and plant rooms, the zonal system is best. Not only do you get a more reliable system, you also get sensitivity adjustment allowing fine tuning for areas that suffer from high humidity or damp. Another advantage of a zonal system is easy of identifying where the leak is. For example, let’s say we have a floor with a small server room, five offices, two tea points, male and female toilets, ten areas in total. In stead of be given a distance of 35 meters to the leak, on a zonal system each room can be individually identified so maintenance staff will immediately knows the leak is in the server room.