46. NEWBEES, external RF transmitters disturb often Wireless Alarm Systems..

46. NEWBEES, external RF transmitters disturb often Wireless Alarm Systems..

Secure Home | Search | About
 Electronic Security in UK    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content add this group's latest topics to your Google content
Subject Author Date
46. NEWBEES, external RF transmitters disturb often Wireless Alarm Systems.. -pull 07-01-2005
Posted by on July 1, 2005, 4:40 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options

Don't thrust wireless alarm systems, use wired!!!

My wireless alarm system was:
- "deaf", muzzled for sensor signal reception
and
- "dead" on alarm giving
when i used a simple commercial available wireless radio headphone,
that simple ..

Its a well known radio transmission problem called "Radio Frequency
Interference" (RFI)
- present at ALL systems (old and new = external) but
- more present than normal in wireless alarm systems due to the low
power transmitters (10milliWatt) used in the sensors
AND
- the use of shared frequencies (obliged) who have disturbances and
are unprotected for RFI (see at FCC and/or other country authorities
for the world frequency band attribution scheme or www.ero.dk for
official info).

What type of signals are able to jeopardize they're operation?
External RF Transmitters operating:
- ON the wireless frequency
- Falling in the receiver band pass
- On the IF frequency (IF = Intermediate Frequency)
- Intermodulation
- Saturating the receiver front end circuit
- Harmonics
- and more...
In essence the problems caused by interference is the fact that by no
way two (or more) systems can use simultaneously the same frequency.

My wireless headphone story showed me "how simple it is" to have the
operation jeopardized completely by an external transmitter operating
on the wireless alarm frequency.

This problem is NOT REPORTED by any mean to the owner, realize what
can happen when you have a wireless FIRE detection system...
The system will no longer detect it (same for intruder alarm).


I replaced my Wireless Alarm System with a wired one; the problem is
solved for me, what about yours?


Some "extra clever pro's" say that the FCC (++) will locate and find
the disturbing signal.
1. Just realize that the local range of the disturbing signal don't
allow to locate it at distance.
2. That other legal users share the wireless alarm frequency
and that they have to find out in that bunch the one whom is
disturbing... Good luck.

Paul



Posted by Roger on July 2, 2005, 9:02 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Newbies...

Don't trust anything this child posts.

He has ignored all of the reponses that he has been given in the past from
people who know what they are talking about. I won't bother to go through
this post and correct his mistakes yet again, but trust me he's a complete
moron with no education.



>
> Don't thrust wireless alarm systems, use wired!!!
>
> My wireless alarm system was:
> - "deaf", muzzled for sensor signal reception
> and
> - "dead" on alarm giving
> when i used a simple commercial available wireless radio headphone,
> that simple ..
>
> Its a well known radio transmission problem called "Radio Frequency
> Interference" (RFI)
> - present at ALL systems (old and new = external) but
> - more present than normal in wireless alarm systems due to the low
> power transmitters (10milliWatt) used in the sensors
> AND
> - the use of shared frequencies (obliged) who have disturbances and
> are unprotected for RFI (see at FCC and/or other country authorities
> for the world frequency band attribution scheme or www.ero.dk for
> official info).
>
> What type of signals are able to jeopardize they're operation?
> External RF Transmitters operating:
> - ON the wireless frequency
> - Falling in the receiver band pass
> - On the IF frequency (IF = Intermediate Frequency)
> - Intermodulation
> - Saturating the receiver front end circuit
> - Harmonics
> - and more...
> In essence the problems caused by interference is the fact that by no
> way two (or more) systems can use simultaneously the same frequency.
>
> My wireless headphone story showed me "how simple it is" to have the
> operation jeopardized completely by an external transmitter operating
> on the wireless alarm frequency.
>
> This problem is NOT REPORTED by any mean to the owner, realize what
> can happen when you have a wireless FIRE detection system...
> The system will no longer detect it (same for intruder alarm).
>
>
> I replaced my Wireless Alarm System with a wired one; the problem is
> solved for me, what about yours?
>
>
> Some "extra clever pro's" say that the FCC (++) will locate and find
> the disturbing signal.
> 1. Just realize that the local range of the disturbing signal don't
> allow to locate it at distance.
> 2. That other legal users share the wireless alarm frequency
> and that they have to find out in that bunch the one whom is
> disturbing... Good luck.
>
> Paul
>




Posted by on July 2, 2005, 11:24 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Amazing Roger that, you say that RFI test = part of EMC testing...
Surprising.

Can you mention what part of EMC testing covers RFI?
What's certified test equipment is required to do what
YOU CALL RFI tests or is it the same certified general coverage
generators and/or power line test equipment?

Can you tell me where the answer has been given dear stupid so
"called" pro?

>wrote:

>This is just semantics. If all that is left for you to argue is the choice
>of letters used then this is the end of the thread as far as I am concerned.
>I was attempting to write so that you would understand. As part of the
>immunity tests carried out for EMC legislation the equipment is tested for
>immunity over a wide frequency range. This is often described as RFI = Radio
>Frequency Interference when the equipment fails. I have been open field EMC
>testing on several occasions and it is referred to as passing or failing RFI
>even though it is part of EMC immunity tests. It's a choice of words. Both
>work and are understood by most.


wrote:

>Newbies...
>
>Don't trust anything this child posts.
>
>He has ignored all of the reponses that he has been given in the past from
>people who know what they are talking about. I won't bother to go through
>this post and correct his mistakes yet again, but trust me he's a complete
>moron with no education.
>
>
>
>>
>> Don't thrust wireless alarm systems, use wired!!!
>>
>> My wireless alarm system was:
>> - "deaf", muzzled for sensor signal reception
>> and
>> - "dead" on alarm giving
>> when i used a simple commercial available wireless radio headphone,
>> that simple ..
>>
>> Its a well known radio transmission problem called "Radio Frequency
>> Interference" (RFI)
>> - present at ALL systems (old and new = external) but
>> - more present than normal in wireless alarm systems due to the low
>> power transmitters (10milliWatt) used in the sensors
>> AND
>> - the use of shared frequencies (obliged) who have disturbances and
>> are unprotected for RFI (see at FCC and/or other country authorities
>> for the world frequency band attribution scheme or www.ero.dk for
>> official info).
>>
>> What type of signals are able to jeopardize they're operation?
>> External RF Transmitters operating:
>> - ON the wireless frequency
>> - Falling in the receiver band pass
>> - On the IF frequency (IF = Intermediate Frequency)
>> - Intermodulation
>> - Saturating the receiver front end circuit
>> - Harmonics
>> - and more...
>> In essence the problems caused by interference is the fact that by no
>> way two (or more) systems can use simultaneously the same frequency.
>>
>> My wireless headphone story showed me "how simple it is" to have the
>> operation jeopardized completely by an external transmitter operating
>> on the wireless alarm frequency.
>>
>> This problem is NOT REPORTED by any mean to the owner, realize what
>> can happen when you have a wireless FIRE detection system...
>> The system will no longer detect it (same for intruder alarm).
>>
>>
>> I replaced my Wireless Alarm System with a wired one; the problem is
>> solved for me, what about yours?
>>
>>
>> Some "extra clever pro's" say that the FCC (++) will locate and find
>> the disturbing signal.
>> 1. Just realize that the local range of the disturbing signal don't
>> allow to locate it at distance.
>> 2. That other legal users share the wireless alarm frequency
>> and that they have to find out in that bunch the one whom is
>> disturbing... Good luck.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>



Posted by Roger on July 2, 2005, 2:39 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Amazing Roger that, you say that RFI test = part of EMC testing...
> Surprising.

Re-Read my post. I wrote the following:-
> If you are asking how is it tested then that's a whole
>document on its own. However I can tell you from experience that apart from
>testing and generating a jamming signal throughtout the whole tested
>spectrum as part of RFI immunity tests...

As you will see, I didn't say RFI test = part of EMC testing, as you seem to
suggest. I was talking about EN50131 and is DOES test for jamming as I
mentioned.

By the way, I am looking at a page that has the phrase Radio Frequency
Interference written 4 times on just one page in an EMC standard document
used in the UK (discussing the test methods used to test for radiated
immunity). So, even though you were talking about the wrong document, you
are also wrong about EMC. It does mention and talk about Radio Frequency
Interference (RFI)!!!.

> Can you tell me where the answer has been given dear stupid so
> "called" pro?
Yes. Look above numb nuts!







Posted by on July 3, 2005, 2:28 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
wrote:

>By the way, I am looking at a page that has the phrase Radio Frequency
>Interference written 4 times on just one page in an EMC standard document
>used in the UK (discussing the test methods used to test for radiated
>immunity). So, even though you were talking about the wrong document, you
>are also wrong about EMC. It does mention and talk about Radio Frequency
>Interference (RFI)!!!.
>
>> Can you tell me where the answer has been given dear stupid so
>> "called" pro?
>Yes. Look above numb nuts!

Its amazing that you can't specify the test text nor the required test
tools...
Thy just don't exist for RFI testing.


Similar ThreadsPosted
26. NEWBEES, if possible avoid wireless alarm systems June 7, 2005, 6:23 pm
Re: 44. Why are wireless alarm systems... June 25, 2005, 5:21 am
Re: 22. Are you an OLD or a NEW VICTIM of wireless alarm systems May 29, 2005, 7:08 pm
Re: 15. Wired / Wireless alarm systems? May 28, 2005, 12:49 am
VICTIMS of wireless alarm systems May 27, 2005, 5:59 am
43. VICTIMS of wireless alarm systems June 23, 2005, 5:44 pm
Are you an OLD or a NEW VICTIM of wireless alarm systems February 26, 2006, 9:28 am
Wireless alarm systems INTERFERING sources May 27, 2005, 5:49 am
Re: 20. RFI is an unavoidable nuisances for wireless alarm systems.. May 31, 2005, 6:55 pm
20. RFI is an unavoidable nuisances for wireless alarm systems.. May 28, 2005, 12:54 am

The site map in XML format XML site map

Contact Us | Privacy Policy