|
Posted by on July 2, 2005, 11:29 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
On Fri, 27 May 2005 05:46:13 +0200, -pull@shoot wrote:
>
>In Wireless alarm systems, the internal required wireless receiver is
>put during Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) in a position that he is
>UNABLE TO RECEIVE and DECODE ANY sensor signal and by consequence he
>is unable to give any kind of warning.
>
>"ALL" wireless alarm system (new and old) uses SHARED frequencies who
>are unprotected and of free use.
> RFI is a normal deal on those shared frequencies due to the
>asynchronous burst principle who has to be used by the equipments
> (look at www.ero.dk for "official" regulation info).
>
>The permanent system interference conflicts who occur due to the
>asynchronous bursts are normal and handled with ID decoding, however,
>an extern transmissions escape on this ID selection rule and render
>decoding nonexistent.
> Non system generated RFI's escape the system reliability possibility.
> A lot of external transmissions generate RFI, they are unpredictable
>and a unavoidable nuisances who muzzle the wireless alarm systems,
>that's the tradeoff limit of wireless alarm systems.
>
>Go "wired" and have a more reliable system.
>
>Paul
| 
XML site map