Yale Premium Alarm Hsa6400 Wirefree Alarm Kit

[bernardgreen]

at the same fraction of a second that an interfering signal blocks a sensor, a chance in some million?

Why do you keep on stating that an interfering signal only blocks a sensor for a fraction of a second. Interference is NOT limited to fractions of a second.

( being accurate it blocks the receiver not the sensor ).

Why don't you look at the equipment that uses 433.92 MHz and see just how long some of it transmits for. You may find some of transmits fro several seconds at a time. Also extend your research into equipment that uses frequencies within the pass band of the receivers. ( as yet mdf has not provided any details of the pass band, you will need to find that information as well ). Then consider the harmonics of continuously operating transmitters, could these fall into the pass band with enough energy to block the receiver.....

To give you a clue as to why this is important


Broad band routers block receivers if they are too close to the panel or siren. Why do they block them ? Routers do not operate on 433.xx MHz so the receiver should not be affected by them yet it is affected to the point of being rendered in-operative.

It appears to be sub-harmonics and maybe side tones of the routers RF signal that falls into the pass band of the receivers and thus blocks them.

 

[JohnD]

But have enough spare cash to have the latest 50" plasma, PS3, and iPhones along with a couple of motors outside.

This thread is not about sneering at the poor, is it?

 

[JohnD]

at the same fraction of a second that an interfering signal blocks a sensor, a chance in some million?

Why do you keep on stating that an interfering signal only blocks a sensor for a fraction of a second.

I'm very disappointed that you keep pretending you can't read. You also dishonestly removed the words "probability that a burglar will break into your house at..." from your quote in order to distort the meaning

The signal from the sensor lasts for a fraction of a second.

Go, on, tell us what you think. What is the probability that an interfering signal will block a sensor at the same fraction of a second that a burglar breaks into your house? One in how many million?

 

[bernardgreen]

What is the probability that an interfering signal will block a sensor at the same fraction of a second that a burglar breaks into your house? One in how many milion?

If the interfering signal is continuous then the sensor's signal will never be received at the panel or will be so corrupted as to be rejected so 1 in 1 ;

If interference is present for 50 % of the time thjen the probability is that half the messages will be lost.

So go away and monitor the channel at the location for at least a 24 hour period to get an accurate value for channel occupancy for that location. Better if you can do it for a week as occupancy patterns for week days will be different from those at weekends. That information will enable you to predict the probability of lost messages for that location. A few hundred yards away and the pattern could be very different.

 

[JohnD]

if...if...

so you still won't say.

you haven't tried a Yale alarm in a typical house, have you?

I have.

Zero failures detected in 10,000 sensor transmissions

And yes of course we would have noticed if the Entry Countdown ever failed to start, or if the door didn't chime. You get used to it happening and notice if it didn't.

 

[Europlex]

And yes of course we would have noticed if the Entry Countdown ever failed to start, or if the door didn't chime. You get used to it happening and notice if it didn't.

.................. and don't forget finding the back door open again that was left open from the morning gardening that you did before you went out.

Leave a protected (& I use the word loosely) door open using a Yale alarm and you'll be none the wiser until it's found later.

 

[JohnD]

I see Euro also wants to avoid estimating the probability that an interfering signal will block a sensor at the same fraction of a second that a burglar breaks into your house.

 

[Europlex]

I see Euro also wants to avoid estimating the probability that an interfering signal will block a sensor at the same fraction of a second that a burglar breaks into your house.

I'd be more concerned that I could leave every Yale alarm protected door open, set the alarm and leave the property.

A warning on the box about this failing would not go amiss.

 

[JohnD]

I remember we had a question about the householder going out and forgetting to set his (professional) alarm earlier.

Going out and leaving all the doors open or unlocked is even more silly and insecure.

Why are you trying to extend the length of this thread?

 

[Europlex]

Ok, just for you, I'll edit/re-write my last post.

I'd be more concerned that I could leave a Yale alarm protected door open, set the alarm and leave the property.

A warning on the box about this failing would not go amiss.

 

[mdf290]

What is the probability that an interfering signal will block a sensor at the same fraction of a second that a burglar breaks into your house? One in how many milion?

If the interfering signal is continuous then the sensor's signal will never be received at the panel or will be so corrupted as to be rejected so 1 in 1 ;

Exactly the same ratio for a two way system in those circumstances too nes pas?

But if course the systems would report this as jamming and activate. If this occured again then it would berisk assesed unlike the people in your story who ignored the issue.

 

[mdf290]

If the alarm is not part of the insurance contract then the insurance company will happily pay out.
The truth is you are better not to tell your insurance company you have an alarm fitted Yale or Grade2 because that way they will pay out even if the alarm was not even set. This applies to Grade 2 also.

They might pay out but on the other hand if the loss adjustor sees the alarm box and the application for cover does not mention the alarm they may decline the claim or reduce the amount due to "inaccurate information given when applying for cover"

OH Pleeeaassee !!

 

[JohnD]

A warning on the box about this failing would not go amiss.

You think there are people who don't already know its silly and insecure to go out leaving their doors open?

What sort of a warning would cure them of being numbskulls?

 

[mdf290]

It would make no difference whatsoever to anyone I had fitted a system for whether they locked their doors or not or left their doors open.

I see the doors simply as sensors to start the countdown when coming home to remind people to unset the alarm.
I ensure every room has a pir sensor even the kitchen when it is covered by the door contact anyway.

Belt and braces is my motto , The question always to ask about any room protected by a door contact is - 'What if they come through the window instead?'

Anyone designing systems that rely on door contacts hasn't got a clue about security anyway and certainly does not know how to risk asses.

 

[alumni]

But have enough spare cash to have the latest 50" plasma, PS3, and iPhones along with a couple of motors outside.

This thread is not about sneering at the poor, is it?

You made that assumption, not me.