Yale Alarm Premium

[streaker99]

Batteries were mentioned, so yes I believe so.

The sensors are flagged up at the panel when they still have approximately 3 weeks life left in them. This condition would not cause a force arm but would light up a warning lamp on the panel and cause the panel to beep every 30 seconds. If you ignore that beeping for 3 weeks then yes the sensor will drop out of the system and you will have to force arm.

How much more spoon fed do you want people to be?

but sadly yes there are people who will ignore all these warnings.

TBH they are twits because a regular battery change all round every 18 months will prevent any problems ever even surfacing. works out about £10 a year in batteries....

 

[Workers]

I dont know about spoon feeding, I was only asking.

 

[streaker99]

I dont know about spoon feeding, I was only asking.

Hi , my comment was not aimed at you

It is aimed at the end users who a small minority of whom strangely never fail to amaze me with lack of wit or wisdom at times.

 

[bernardgreen]

It is aimed at the end users who a small minority of whom strangely never fail to amaze me with lack of wit or wisdom at times.

Can you blame them for that....They buy a box of bits that is labelled as being a " DIY burglar alarm" and, given what is on the box, they assume it will work the same as all other burglar alarms do.

It is not a lack of wit or wisdom. it is lack of knowledge about burglar alarms and how the various different types of alarm systems work. The problems that low cost licence exempt wireless equipment will suffer from are for me clear to see as I have for many years worked in radio communication design. That experience enables me to predict the problems that will occur when using low cost licence exempt wireless in an application.

The "buy me" boxes that contain anything using licence exempt wireless need to have the un-avoidable compromises, ( battery changing, restricted range, co channel interference etc etc) printed on the outside and clearly visible BEFORE the box is purchased and not hidden away inside the box at time of purchase.

It doesn't help when people with some knowledge and some experience promote these systems as being reliable in all situations when theory shows they cannot be reliable in all situations and experience ( and proper testing ) proves there are many situations where they are not relaible. The small print inside the box often covers the manufacturer by explaining why in some situations the system will not be reliable. But by then it is often too late to be able to return the equipment.

 

[streaker99]

. . . . . . I think you lost everyone after the first few lines.

 

[Workers]

I think it was clear and concise enough for all but the dimmest ( Sorry dim folks). It shows that low end equipment is not as reliable as it is alleged at times. As it has to accept interference and not have frequency changes as does the higher end equipment. For example a wireless doorbell next door has been known to set off cheaper equipment. Although not as bad as when it first came out and when the passing mini cab driver called base the things went off.
Things could get a little better when the old TV frequencies become free and the new licences are contested for. All hail the digital revolution.

 

[JohnD]

Can you blame them for that....They buy a box of bits that is labelled as being a " DIY burglar alarm" and, given what is on the box, they assume it will work the same as all other burglar alarms do.

I would have thought the typical householder buying a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package expects it to work like a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package.

I doubt many DIYing householders have studied how "all" other systems wotk.

 

[streaker99]

I think everyone here is going off on a tangent.
The reason people end up force arming their systems is not because of a system failure but because of a failure of the people fitting the alarm to simply read the instructions properly and take in all the information.
If they had read the instructions they would have solved any problems and not arrived at a force arm scenario.

The original poster however was correct to ask the question he did however because that issue is not fully explained in the manual.

This for clarification is how the system works in practice in relation to door or window contacts and setting the alarm.

If for arguments sake you have some window contacts in your bedroom as you live in a bungalow but you still want protection while you sleep you may decide that it is too hot and you want to open a window.
You would still be able to set the alarm even if your window was open at the time you set the alarm.
However should you then close that window at any stage it would then immediately trigger the alarm if it was opened again.

The door and window contacts send a signal to the panel on the condition where the magnet moves away from the sensor.

Of course the way you add sensors and use the system is all part of the initial risk assesment.

This is the issue that I feel is the real reason DIY equipment does not perform the same way as professional equipment. If someone not aware of how to perform a proper risk assesment fits a system you can be sure their property will not be adequately protected.

The issue of the merits of pro vs DIY equipment becomes secondary if in actual fact someone could still burgle the home without even setting off a sensor anyway because there wasn't one there in the first place.

 

[bernardgreen]

I would have thought the typical householder buying a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package expects it to work like a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package.

I doubt many DIYing householders have studied how "all" other systems wotk.

EXACTLY. They have no knowledge of alarm systems. Therefore they cannot make a comparison other than on price.

They do not know what functions are essential in a reliable alarm system so they cannot see that many of those functions are missing from a low cost DIY alarm because the design has to be low cost and comply with the restrictions imposed on wireless equipment using licence exempt frequencies.

 

[bernardgreen]

This is the issue that I feel is the real reason DIY equipment does not perform the same way as professional equipment. If someone not aware of how to perform a proper risk assesment fits a system you can be sure their property will not be adequately protected.

EXACTLY. The risk assessment requires far more knowledge and experience than is know by the DIY installer.

The issue of the merits of pro vs DIY equipment becomes secondary if in actual fact someone could still burgle the home without even setting off a sensor anyway because there wasn't one there in the first place.

WRONG. The issue is that the owner of a DIY system will have a false sense of security believing that the DIY system they ( or someone else ) installed in their house will provide them security. We have just read that some DIY alarms can be set while one or more of the protected windows or doors are open. That is ZERO protection due to installer not being aware of this failing in the system. ( applies to systems using one way wireless communication from sensors to control panel )

The owner of a professionally installed system will not have that sort of failure in their system as a professional installer will be aware that some systems can be set with doors and windows still open and will not use that type of equipment.

 

[JohnD]

They have no knowledge of alarm systems. Therefore they cannot make a comparison other than on price.

They know they want a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package, so that's what they buy.

You need to curb your resentment that there are people who want a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package

 

[bernardgreen]

You need to curb your resentment that there are people who want a low-cost, easy to fit DIY package

John

I have no resentment. My concern is that they are mislead into believing the low-cost, easy to fit DIY package will provide them with a secure and reliable system when it cannot provide them with that. If the alarm can be set with a door or window open without giving any indication to the person setting it then the system has a serious flaw. We know why it has that flaw and I wonder if that flaw is specifically mentioned in the instructions. Does it say " the alarm can be set and appear to have set correctly even though one or more doors or windows are open" or does it just say " ensure all doors and windows are shut before setting the alarm " without any mention that the system will not check they are closed at time of setting.

I have just realised that if a magnet has fallen off during the day and the sensor "sees" the door as open the control panel will not know the door is open when the alarm is being set. Even though the user has closed the door and set the alarm there will be nothing to warn the user that the door is not protected by the alarm system.

No wonder the technically aware people in the insurance companies and remote monitoring centres are so concerned about some types of wireless linked alarm systems and refuse to accept them.

 

[streaker99]

Yes all the magnets I have ever fitted were BOTH stuck with double sided AND screwed into place.

You're right of course they keep dropping off all the time , what am I to do