Wired alarm for 2 doors - minimum cost (DIY)?

[mdf290]

Hello Dagoof,

John and mdf have put me 'in my place' with regard to my last post. I should have known better. I mentioned power cables and so on. Some years ago, I had a bitter experience with trade equipment giving frequent false alarms. I can remember the site of the installation as if it were yesterday, Without going into detail, it transpired that the fault was not with the equipment used, rather with the night watchman (security guards they are called these days). Therefore, my apologies for that false insinuation, please disregard it and give a big thankyou to these guys.

Take Care,

Chain Daisy.

Hey as Bernard will tell you you can never predict how a system will work until you have it actually in place in the environment it will be in .

I am sure are correct about your experience.

However because every setting is different and radio waves can be influenced in many ways its difficult to just say it wont work in x , y or Z environment or equally that it will work in x , y or z environment.
You had a bad experience you had every right to say so. All we are saying is it's not that black and white that it wont work near a busy road etc and that the experience proves they work a lot more often than they don't.

 

[chaindaisy]

".... I have installed Yales near busy roads with absolutely no problems whatsoever. I also never had problems with overhead power lines. I assume you mean electrified rail lines? Can't comment on that one as There aren't many electrified lines around up here. I would suspect only the arcing would cause inteference but it would not be likely to trigger the jamming detection as its duration would not fall within the criteria of the algorithm...."

mdf, I've got to say it, you are one clever guy. You know this gear backwards. Things are a bit tight at the moment but I intend buying a Yale system, I like them and I like your knowledge of them. Maybe later in the spring I'll have enough sheckels to get one.

Thanks for your posts, they are brilliant.

 

[bernardgreen]

Hey as Bernard will tell you you can never predict how a system will work until you have it actually in place in the environment it will be in .

You CAN make a fairly accurate prediction by doing a radio survey of the site BEFORE commiting to purchase.

Of course the survey results are valid only for the period of the survey and there could be a significant change in channel usage the day after the survey has been completed.

 

[JohnD]

bearing in mind that a Yale system costs between £100 and £200 retail, of course, and that we have not yet had any evidence of RF interference preventing a Yale system from working in an ordinary domestic house in an ordinary residential street, some might question the ROI of an RF survey.

 

[chaindaisy]

Thanks John,

You and mdf are the 'bees knees'.

Take care mate.

 

[mdf290]

My advice is simple in this regard.
If you fit a Yale alarm and have trouble with suspected inteference causing false alarms then take it back to the shop for a refund.
Challenge any refund policy with it's 'Fitness for purpose' under the sale of goods act.
That's what I would do. I would not throw it in a skip , I'd go get my money back. I offer this to anyone who has a Yale alarm installed and since 2008 not a single person has asked for a refund.

 

[bernardgreen]

If you fit a Yale alarm and have trouble with suspected inteference causing false alarms then take it back to the shop for a refund.
Challenge any refund policy with it's 'Fitness for purpose' under the sale of goods act.

It is fit for purpose, read the terms and conditions applicable to the use of the licence exempt regulations. The equipment complies with them. The fact that its operation is likely to be compromised when the licence exempt channel is busy is a condition the purchaser accepts when purchasing licence exempt radio equipment.

That said very few people are made aware of this condition when they purchase and many manufacturers and suppliers should do more to bring this condition to the attention of purchasers.

If a refund is refused and the supplier did not point out the condition then a refund might be obtained on the basis that the terms and conditions applicable to the use of a licence free radio channel were not made clear at the time of purchase.

The fact that some manufacturers have included an optional alarm on jamming function proves they have taken into account the requirement that their equipment using licence exempt radio channels must tolerate interference and respond in a suitable way when there is interference.

 

[mdf290]

Fitness for purpose under the sale of goods act is not based on whether the goods comply with regulations but whether they perform the job reasonably expected of the purchaser.
Fitness for purpose is not set in stone by regulations.

If you bought a car to pull a caravan and you told the salesman that you were buying it to pull a caravan and it stopped halfway up the first hill you would have a perfect fitness for purpose claim regardless of whether the vehicle passed alll the regulations confirming it was a 'car'.

Therefore If I bought an alarm and it was waking me up all night because of false alarms I would easily argue it was not fit for purpose and get a refund.

Just because the manufacturer had suggested a work around would not make me accept that solution under the sale of goods act either.

If the jamming detection is turned off I could easily argue that the system could be jammed at the time a break in occurs and it would not then activate and therefore fail the fitness for purpose test again.

I am 100% behind not using a wireless alarm where inteference causes a problem.

However I totally refute due to my own experience of these systems that in domestic environments you will automatically have problems with inteference or that a one way wireless system is not acceptable as a security solution.

I will say this to you now . . I have put up nearly 2000 systems I have had ONE phone call relating to false alarms which could possibly have related to inteference. It wasn't in the end. It was my using a pir that I had in stock for sometime and the batteries were low.

The predominant cause of false alarms in Yale systems is simply low batteries in sensors. When the batteries get very low the sensors can shut down and then reinstate themselves as the batteries level fluctuates. When it reinstates it sends a handshake signal which sets off a set alarm.

 

[bernardgreen]

If you bought a car to pull a caravan

you would reasonably be expected to know it would need a towing ball and a bit more power than the average car. Therefor you would ask about these before buying the car. If you didn't mention towing a caravan to the salesman then it would be reasonable that he would not need to mention that the car was not suited to towing a caravan.

Very few people who buy a DIY alarm system can be reasonably expected to have much if any knowledge about interference so are unlikely to ask the sales person how the system will operate where there are other users of the radio channel.

When the batteries get very low the sensors can shut down and then reinstate themselves as the batteries level fluctuates. When it reinstates it sends a handshake signal which sets off a set alarm.

So when the sensor shuts down there is no alarm ? A sensor is no longer active and the panel ignores the loss of a sensor ?
And you should know that handshake on one way communication channel is impossible.

 

[mdf290]

you would reasonably be expected to know it would need a towing ball and a bit more power than the average car. Therefor you would ask about these before buying the car. If you didn't mention towing a caravan to the salesman then it would be reasonable that he would not need to mention that the car was not suited to towing a caravan.

Very few people who buy a DIY alarm system can be reasonably expected to have much if any knowledge about interference so are unlikely to ask the sales person how the system will operate where there are other users of the radio channel.

My apologies not a 'handshake' but an 'I am here' signal.

Your other comment is not relevant.

You would not have to know anything about inteference to take something back that was keeping you awake all night. Just the fact that it is waking you up is reason enough to claim it has failed your expectations.

The box says the alarm will call your phone if the alarm is activated.
thats quite a claim and there is no rider attached to that comment so if your alarm is incapable for providing that facility it has failed its fitness for purpose. The buyer does not have to be aware of why that happened.

You want everyone to know that a wireless system may fail when needed possibly in the hope noone buys them.
I think you would be surprised how many people would still buy them even armed with your uncorroborated black doom scenario.

google the net and see if you can find even a singe report of someone being burgled when their yale alarm was set.

 

[bernardgreen]

You want everyone to know that a wireless system may fail when needed possibly

I would like to see people fully aware of the compromises in function that the use of a licence exempt frequency, battery operation and low cost to manufacture imposes on the equipment they are buying

in the hope noone buys them.

Wrong.

I think you would be surprised how many people would still buy them even armed with your uncorroborated black doom scenario.

Uncorroborated ? who fits jamming detection and why do they fit it ?

google the net and see if you can find even a singe report of someone being burgled when their yale alarm was set.

There are other sources that are not accessible to google searching.

 

[JohnD]

We have seen no evidence that RF interference has prevented one sounding the alarm during a break in when it is installed in an ordinary domestic house in an ordinary residential street.

Bernard is obsessed with his fanciful speculation.

 

[mdf290]

So when the sensor shuts down there is no alarm ? A sensor is no longer active and the panel ignores the loss of a sensor ?

Completely wrong on that account Bernard.

The panel will first flag up that the sensor battery is low by bleeping every thirty seconds and illuminating a warning light on the panel.
In addition to this the LED display will say 'Battery low 'lounge'' or whatever you have named that particular sensor during installation.
If this is ignored and the sensor battery goes completely flat then the panel will bleep every 30 seconds and illuminate the warning light and this time the LCD screen will display the message 'Out of order 'Lounge'' (or whatever you have named that sensor).
In addition to the control panel warnings the pir's themselves will indicate a low battery condition by flashing the leds for a prolonged period when movement is detected. You will also get five beeps from your siren when you try to set the alarm when a low battery situation occurs.

The system bends over backwards to warn people about low batteries and not surprisingly after learning how pig headed people can be they still let the batteries fail.

The panel also warns when a sensor falls out of range or if its test signals are not received. All this information in written display on the panel.

..but then I forgot Bernard you have never even installed one so how can I possibly expect you to know how they work and how they are configured to protect the consumer.

 

[bernardgreen]

If this is ignored and the sensor battery goes completely flat then the panel will bleep every 30 seconds and illuminate the warning light and this time the LCD screen will display the message 'Out of order 'Lounge'' (or whatever you have named that sensor)

Please tell the readers what happens if the battery goes totally flat ( or that battery contact problem disses the battery ) while the alarm is set.

If a sensor sends "Battery Low" or due to no power left a sensor stops sending any messages while the alarm is set then does the panel inform the user ( who may be on holiday ) or does it set the siren going ?

..but then I forgot Bernard you have never even installed one so how can I possibly expect you to know how they work and how they are configured to protect the consumer.

But I have read your comments and explanations about the way the system functions. You might convince a prospective purchaser but you set alarm bells ringing in the minds of people who have some knowledge about what an alarm system should be.

 

[bernardgreen]

I've only yesterday had to teach you and the village idiot the basic principles.

Was that before or after you screwed up on current limiting resistor values and had to be corrected. ( 500 mA through a 470 ohm resistor )

Why don't you have the courage to explain your background and how you acquired your knowledge ?

what happens when a battery goes flat in a wired system.

In a wired system the batteries are for back up when the mains supply fails. The sensors do not rely on batteries from normal operation, un-like most wireless systems where the sensor do rely on their batteries for normal use.