Re: Window Screen Tamper

["ABLE1" <royboynospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0634c15f-de4a-4821-bea4-a4b1ba1afbf1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On May 23, 7:22?am, "ABLE1" <royboynos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> I have quite a number of screens in from this same vendor without an
> issue,
> most for longer than 8 to 10 years. ?These screens are still under
> warrantee
> at this time. ?I was hoping that someone here may have had similar
> problems
> and could lend some insight as to the specifics of what could be going on.
>
> Again thanks for the input.
>
> Les- -

"Exposed to weather and the elements is a lot different then
submersing them in a tank of water. There's not much chance of the
frame filling up with water under normal conditions. I'd think they'd
be using a "Hypot" method to test them. That is, there is test
equipment available that puts a high potential of voltage across two
objects. If there is any path of possible conductivity leakage the
Hypot will locate it. Perhaps this is not appropriate with considering
the reed switch in the circuit but there's got to be a better way than
submersing the screens in water.

So if they submerse them in water and then what? Try to measure a
short between the screen frame and the conductor wire? There may not
be a short to the frame but if water is captured near a bare wire ....
it will corrode.

I know you said you've been using them for a while but maybe they're
using a new method, new method or they've got some new people working
for them ....... The description of how the problem occurs sure sounds
like a corrosion problem to me. Maybe it might be worth it to tear the
screen apart yourself. Depends on how much a new screen would cost
you. If it were me, I'd want to be the the one to point out to the
vendor where his problem was rather than letting them try to find it.
If it IS them, you know your not going to get a straight answer.


By a 'Hipot Tester'  you mean a Megger(brand name).  I have used a Megger to
test insulation on motor windings to ensure the resistance is within correct
values after a motor re-wind and it did not have any possible shorts to the
motor case.  It may work in this case but I would think it is questionable.
I say this because it would seem to me that the insulation at the point of
failure would have to be in close proximity to the frame if not touching it.
That being said, how can this be assured inside of the frame??  Then again
maybe a tolerance value can be developed if you do enough QC and a bell
curve can be produced.  The voltage on the contacts would not be an issue
unless it is directly shorted to the frame.

Thanks for reminding me about the Megger, it has been over 20 years since I
used one.  Very helpful input.

I am sure that some here are thinking that I am just rambling.  Well I am.
But my hope is that it may help someone other than me, in some way in the
future.

Les