I have a wireless Yale alarm, battery operated.
I dont have a need to use it often but find the batteries in one
particular PIR only lasts approx 6 months, the others maybe 18 months.
This PIR is passed multiple times a day, so my question is, even though
the alarm is not turned on does the PIR use battery power everytime
someone passes it.

"ss" wrote in message
...
I have a wireless Yale alarm, battery operated.
I dont have a need to use it often but find the batteries in one
particular PIR only lasts approx 6 months, the others maybe 18 months.
This PIR is passed multiple times a day, so my question is, even though
the alarm is not turned on does the PIR use battery power everytime
someone passes it.

Of course - battery power is required to run the PIR sensor, whether or not
it senses anything. Perhaps that particular one has been set for higher
sensitivity, requiring more power.
--
Dave W

ss submitted this idea :
I have a wireless Yale alarm, battery operated.
I dont have a need to use it often but find the batteries in one particular
PIR only lasts approx 6 months, the others maybe 18 months. This PIR is
passed multiple times a day, so my question is, even though the alarm is not
turned on does the PIR use battery power everytime someone passes it.

Alarm on or off, will make no difference to the PIR. Every time the PIR
is triggered, it will report that it has been triggered to the main
alarm unit. Therefore the PIR will have the same battery consumption
whether the main alarm is on or off.

If it concerns you, you might consider covering that PIR with some
material which prevents it from detecting (or turning it out of sight)
and removing the material when it is turned on.

On 06/09/2017 00:03, Dave W wrote:
"ss" wrote in message
...
I have a wireless Yale alarm, battery operated.
I dont have a need to use it often but find the batteries in one
particular PIR only lasts approx 6 months, the others maybe 18 months.
This PIR is passed multiple times a day, so my question is, even though
the alarm is not turned on does the PIR use battery power everytime
someone passes it.

Of course - battery power is required to run the PIR sensor, whether or not
it senses anything. Perhaps that particular one has been set for higher
sensitivity, requiring more power.


Possibly because its wireless it only transmit if it detects something.
The PIR circuit is low power and works 100% of the time and the
transmitter requires extra power which is taken from the battery on
every movement detection. One sensor sees little movement hence taking
less power and has a longer battery life whilst the other sensors make
more transmissions and has a shorter battery life.

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

That very much depends on whether the device simply sends a signal down a
wire or whatever, or whether it actually controls a relay or something like
that. Its an unanswerable question.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"ss" wrote in message
...
I have a wireless Yale alarm, battery operated.
I dont have a need to use it often but find the batteries in one
particular PIR only lasts approx 6 months, the others maybe 18 months.
This PIR is passed multiple times a day, so my question is, even though
the alarm is not turned on does the PIR use battery power everytime
someone passes it.

If its wireless then one supposes it needs to power a transmitter every time
it operates?
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Dave W" wrote in message
news

"ss" wrote in message
...
I have a wireless Yale alarm, battery operated.
I dont have a need to use it often but find the batteries in one
particular PIR only lasts approx 6 months, the others maybe 18 months.
This PIR is passed multiple times a day, so my question is, even though
the alarm is not turned on does the PIR use battery power everytime
someone passes it.

Of course - battery power is required to run the PIR sensor, whether or
not it senses anything. Perhaps that particular one has been set for
higher sensitivity, requiring more power.
--
Dave W

"Brian Gaff" Wrote in message:
That very much depends on whether the device simply sends a signal down a
wire or whatever, or whether it actually controls a relay or something like
that. Its an unanswerable question.
Brian


As its
a wireless device there's erm.. no wire..

ISTR that these PIRs do "fire" a transmission to the control unit
even when the alarm is notionally "off". So PIRs in busy areas
will tend to drain batts quicker than others.

Time for better batts in the busy locations?

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Brian Gaff" Wrote in message:
That very much depends on whether the device simply sends a signal
down a wire or whatever, or whether it actually controls a relay or
something like that. Its an unanswerable question.
Brian


As its

ISTR that these PIRs do "fire" a transmission to the control unit
even when the alarm is notionally "off". So PIRs in busy areas
will tend to drain batts quicker than others.

Time for better batts in the busy locations?

Or do the sensible thing and used wired ones. ;-)

--
*ATHEISM IS A NON-PROPHET ORGANIZATION.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 06/09/2017 10:47, Huge wrote:
Has it been configured to light up its little LED? Wireless PIRs can be
configured either way (you need the LED for walk tests and so forth) but
they should normally be configured off to preserve the batteries. I have
a fully wireless system and the batteries easily last a year.

I am not aware of being able to configure it to off (I will check that),
having said that it will flash when the battery is low.
The LED does not normally flash when the alarm system is not armed.

On 06/09/2017 09:10, jim wrote:
ISTR that these PIRs do "fire" a transmission to the control unit
even when the alarm is notionally "off". So PIRs in busy areas
will tend to drain batts quicker than others.

Time for better batts in the busy locations?

As it is just the one PIR and alarm is rarely used I can block the
`lense` and hopefully that will conseve the battery.
Its not the cost but the pain of having to change them so the less the
better.

On 06/09/2017 07:34, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
If it concerns you, you might consider covering that PIR with some
material which prevents it from detecting (or turning it out of sight)
and removing the material when it is turned on.

I have today covered it with a piece of paper for now. The alarm is only
used maybe 4 weeks in the year so it was a pain having to disarm the
alarm etc to replace the batteries when rarely used.

The dog makes enough noise if anyone comes near the house when its
occupied. :-)

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Brian Gaff" Wrote in message:
That very much depends on whether the device simply sends a signal
down a wire or whatever, or whether it actually controls a relay or
something like that. Its an unanswerable question.
Brian


As its

ISTR that these PIRs do "fire" a transmission to the control unit
even when the alarm is notionally "off". So PIRs in busy areas
will tend to drain batts quicker than others.

Time for better batts in the busy locations?

Or do the sensible thing and used wired ones. ;-)


With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 07:34, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
If it concerns you, you might consider covering that PIR with some
material which prevents it from detecting (or turning it out of sight)
and removing the material when it is turned on.

I have today covered it with a piece of paper for now. The alarm is only
used maybe 4 weeks in the year so it was a pain having to disarm the
alarm etc to replace the batteries when rarely used.

The dog makes enough noise if anyone comes near the house when its
occupied. :-)


IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair :-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed the
wireless system?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed the
wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one PIR which is 6
monthly, but hopefully now solved.

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed the
wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one PIR which is 6
monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to another sort of
sensor - magnetic contact
?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Brian Gaff" Wrote in message:
That very much depends on whether the device simply sends a signal
down a wire or whatever, or whether it actually controls a relay or
something like that. Its an unanswerable question.
Brian


As its

ISTR that these PIRs do "fire" a transmission to the control unit
even when the alarm is notionally "off". So PIRs in busy areas
will tend to drain batts quicker than others.

Time for better batts in the busy locations?

Or do the sensible thing and used wired ones. ;-)


With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.

--
*Change is inevitable ... except from vending machines *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Brian Gaff" Wrote in message:
That very much depends on whether the device simply sends a signal
down a wire or whatever, or whether it actually controls a relay or
something like that. Its an unanswerable question.
Brian


As its

ISTR that these PIRs do "fire" a transmission to the control unit
even when the alarm is notionally "off". So PIRs in busy areas
will tend to drain batts quicker than others.

Time for better batts in the busy locations?

Or do the sensible thing and used wired ones. ;-)


With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

Did you or the OP think any differently?!

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.

--
*If I worked as much as others, I would do as little as they *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.

--
*Caution: I drive like you do.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

Thanks for confirming you are so stupid you can't even imagine an alarm
that can use both wireless and wired sensors. How do you find your way
around with that tunnel vision?

Of course I do also realise wiring up an alarm would be beyond you.

--
*Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with wired sensors" ffs dave :-D

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

you are woddles aicmfp
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

Thanks for confirming you are so stupid you can't even imagine an alarm
that can use both wireless and wired sensors. How do you find your way
around with that tunnel vision?

Of course I do also realise wiring up an alarm would be beyond you.


Read the thread you dozy ****wit.
(NB It's about a Yale wireless alarm system... :-D :-D )

The only reference to wired sensors is from someone called "Dive
Plow****"

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

jim k wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with wired sensors" ffs dave :-D

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

you are woddles aicmfp

In my house is an ethernet network and a wi-fi network connected
(ultimately) to the same router. Is this a clue?

--

Roger Hayter

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
jim k wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with wired sensors" ffs dave :-D

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

you are woddles aicmfp

In my house is an ethernet network and a wi-fi network connected
(ultimately) to the same router. Is this a clue?


Ho ho wodge!

Do you have a Yale wireless alarm system?have you added wired
detectors to it? Tell us more....

I believe the OP's wireless system requires 240v.... for those of
a pedantic nature that does not mean it's not a wireless alarm
system :-)
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

jim k wrote:

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
jim k wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with wired sensors" ffs dave :-D

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

you are woddles aicmfp

In my house is an ethernet network and a wi-fi network connected
(ultimately) to the same router. Is this a clue?


Ho ho wodge!

Do you have a Yale wireless alarm system?have you added wired
detectors to it? Tell us more....

I believe the OP's wireless system requires 240v.... for those of
a pedantic nature that does not mean it's not a wireless alarm
system :-)

If the Yale Wireless System can't also use wired switches then it is a
very badly designed system. A bit of research confirms that. I would
not want a system which could only work with wireless devices. Hybrid
systems do exist.



--

Roger Hayter

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
jim k wrote:

(Roger Hayter) Wrote in message:
jim k wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
With a Yale wireless system?

Tell us more ....

You bought a system that can only take wireless sensors? Silly boy.


I presume that would be (at the least) the accepted definition
of a "wireless system"...

You think wrong, then.


Bwahahahahaha
Time to shine Dave :-)

Time to learn to read and understand Jim. It's never too late.


For me no, shame your funked up ramblings make no sense.

"Wireless alarms systems with wired sensors" ffs dave :-D

is it the presence of power & maybe phone "wires" of a wireless
alarm system you're relying on getting you out of your amusing
little diy corner? :-D

you are woddles aicmfp

In my house is an ethernet network and a wi-fi network connected
(ultimately) to the same router. Is this a clue?


Ho ho wodge!

Do you have a Yale wireless alarm system?have you added wired
detectors to it? Tell us more....

I believe the OP's wireless system requires 240v.... for those of
a pedantic nature that does not mean it's not a wireless alarm
system :-)

If the Yale Wireless System can't also use wired switches then it is a
very badly designed system. A bit of research confirms that.

Hehe. A wireless system also needs capability to handle wired
detectors? Really? Why?

I would
not want a system which could only work with wireless devices.

Irrelevant.

Hybrid
systems do exist.

No **** sherlock!

But (with possibly another bit of research needed by those who
clearly do not have a clue despite arguing at length otherwise)
the system discussed in this thread clearly *is not one of
them*.

Thanks for confirming & putting dive out of his misery.

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
jim k wrote:
If the Yale Wireless System can't also use wired switches then it is a
very badly designed system. A bit of research confirms that.

Hehe. A wireless system also needs capability to handle wired
detectors? Really? Why?

Because then there wouldn't be the problem of the sensor batteries going
flat. Simples. Like your mind.

--
*I'm pretty sure that sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
If the Yale Wireless System can't also use wired switches then it is a
very badly designed system. A bit of research confirms that.

Hehe. A wireless system also needs capability to handle wired
detectors? Really? Why?

Because then there wouldn't be the problem of the sensor batteries going
flat. Simples. Like your mind.


You've been excused already dive...

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

ss brought next idea :
As it is just the one PIR and alarm is rarely used I can block the `lense`
and hopefully that will conseve the battery.
Its not the cost but the pain of having to change them so the less the
better.

Another way, might be coble together a mains powered replacement for
the battery.

Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
ss brought next idea :
As it is just the one PIR and alarm is rarely used I can block the `lense`
and hopefully that will conseve the battery.
Its not the cost but the pain of having to change them so the less the
better.

Another way, might be coble together a mains powered replacement for
the battery.


won't work in a power cut?

A bigger external battery feed would last longer...
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
jim k wrote:
Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
ss brought next idea :
As it is just the one PIR and alarm is rarely used I can block the `lense`
and hopefully that will conseve the battery.
Its not the cost but the pain of having to change them so the less the
better.

Another way, might be coble together a mains powered replacement for
the battery.


won't work in a power cut?

A bigger external battery feed would last longer...

Absolutely anything to get round doing the job properly - with cable. ;-)

--
*How many roads must a man travel down before he admits he is lost?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" Wrote in message:
In article ,
jim k wrote:
Harry Bloomfield Wrote in message:
ss brought next idea :
As it is just the one PIR and alarm is rarely used I can block the `lense`
and hopefully that will conseve the battery.
Its not the cost but the pain of having to change them so the less the
better.

Another way, might be coble together a mains powered replacement for
the battery.


won't work in a power cut?

A bigger external battery feed would last longer...

Absolutely anything to get round doing the job properly - with cable. ;-)


Read thread again dive.
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to interfere
&
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed the
wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one PIR
which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to another sort
of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save a lot on
batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 15:46 11 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to interfere
&
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed the
wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one PIR
which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to another sort
of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save a lot on
batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?

The radio transmission signal is likely to draw several times more
current than the PIR sensor in stand-by.


So what's using up the batteries in that particular PIR more than
the identical others that the OP has?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:12 12 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 15:46 11 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to
interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed
the wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one PIR
which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to another
sort of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save a lot
on batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?

The radio transmission signal is likely to draw several times
more current than the PIR sensor in stand-by.


So what's using up the batteries in that particular PIR more
than the identical others that the OP has?

The repeated transmission.


So... how to reduce the number of repetitive transmissions?

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 20:14 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:12 12 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 15:46 11 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to
interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought & installed
the wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one PIR
which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to another
sort of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save a lot
on batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?

The radio transmission signal is likely to draw several times
more current than the PIR sensor in stand-by.


So what's using up the batteries in that particular PIR more
than the identical others that the OP has?

The repeated transmission.


So... how to reduce the number of repetitive transmissions?

"ss" answered that early in this thread.


So did I.
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 23:15 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 20:14 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:12 12 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 15:46 11 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to
interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought &
installed the wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this one
PIR which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to
another sort of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save a
lot on batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?

The radio transmission signal is likely to draw several
times more current than the PIR sensor in stand-by.


So what's using up the batteries in that particular PIR
more than the identical others that the OP has?

The repeated transmission.


So... how to reduce the number of repetitive transmissions?

"ss" answered that early in this thread.


So did I.

So, why did you ask me the question?


Read (all) the thread
..
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 18:02 15 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 23:15 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 20:14 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:12 12 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 15:46 11 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour to
interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought &
installed the wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this
one PIR which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to
another sort of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save a
lot on batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?

The radio transmission signal is likely to draw several
times more current than the PIR sensor in stand-by.


So what's using up the batteries in that particular PIR
more than the identical others that the OP has?

The repeated transmission.


So... how to reduce the number of repetitive transmissions?

"ss" answered that early in this thread.


So did I.

So, why did you ask me the question?


Read (all) the thread .

You're unable to explain why you asked a question which had
already been answered in this thread? I think you should read the
thread, not me.


Troll.
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

pamela Wrote in message:
On 23:12 17 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 18:02 15 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 23:15 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 20:14 14 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:12 12 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 15:46 11 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

pamela Wrote in message:
On 21:31 6 Sep 2017, jim wrote:

ss Wrote in message:
On 06/09/2017 18:33, jim wrote:
IIRC, enter "programming mode" & you have an hour
to interfere &
change batts etc
? (with small crosshead screwdriver &
stepladder/chair:-) ).

Presumably you knew all this when you bought &
installed the wireless system?

Yes,and I change them every two years but for this
one PIR which is 6 monthly, but hopefully now
solved.



You could also perhaps reposition it or change to
another sort of sensor - magnetic contact?

He's using wireless. How will wireless magnetic save
a lot on batteries?


What's using up the batteries in the PIR?

The radio transmission signal is likely to draw several
times more current than the PIR sensor in stand-by.


So what's using up the batteries in that particular PIR
more than the identical others that the OP has?

The repeated transmission.


So... how to reduce the number of repetitive
transmissions?

"ss" answered that early in this thread.


So did I.

So, why did you ask me the question?


Read (all) the thread .

You're unable to explain why you asked a question which had
already been answered in this thread? I think you should read
the thread, not me.

Troll.

You made a poor diagnosis and tried to cover it up. It's not so
important that you have to argue about it.


It was a suggested solution to the OP's issue, trolly.
Who's arguing? Mine are statements of fact....

Re-read the thread
:-)
(whether you understand it this time I don't GAF YMMV).
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/