Re: 45. Professionals always say that the latest wireless alarm system

[-pull@shoot]

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 20:05:09 GMT, "Roger" <rumble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>> Professionals always say that the latest wireless alarm system have
>> all kind of manufacturer unsupported, unspecified features who avoid
>> and detect RFI...
>>
>> Good, two questions arise:
>> - what shall be done with the old sailor (systems)?
>What's that got to do with anything?. Dumb question. Have you got a color
>television or a black and white one?. I bet its color and I bet sometime in
>the past you or your family had a black & white one. What did you do with
>the black and white one?.

When you have a car where the brakes don't work, throw it away. When
an alarm system is outdated and the newer once "are proven" to be
better for RFI, throw them away or better go wired.

>> - why are those pro's imaginative features not documented, supported
>>  and warranted by the manufacturer?
>They usually are documented, supported and warranted. The documentation
>states that jamming is detected and specifies how it operates and under what
>circumstances (there is your documentation), the product is supported and
>that includes the features of the product (there's your support) and unless
>your product is a cheap knock-off it will come with a warrenty (there's your
>warranty). Paul, why don't you find a panel that has jamming detection and
>download the manual or talk to a technical sales rep. They usually answer
>all questions with coutesy.
>
>>  Where is the documentation support who state that RFI has no effect

>Who said that RFI has no effect?. I have always said that any suitable
>jamming signal is detected and reported. This is not 'no effect'. On the
>contrary. If RFI was present then you would not want 'no effect'.

I have always said that detection is "maybe possible" with that kind
of thing, it need to be "justified and supported by the manufacturers"
specifying the conditions where/how/delay it detect.

>>  or will warn that typical type of system failure after hours or so?

>Hours?. What standard specifies 'hours' as an acceptible level of security?.
>No. I understand that you are based in Europe and unless your specific
>country does not follow EN50131 or a similar derivative then even at the
>worst grade level, jamming should be reported to the user & central station
>when jamming occurs for 30 seconds in a rolling minute. Read the standards.

Can you specify what item of the EN50131 specify that it test:
- transmitter voluntary generated interferences with
  unreasonable signal strength ON the alarm frequency
 and
- not test the allowed internal generated signal levels produced
   by other equipments who conform to the maximum authorized
   stray signals?