Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+DSC\s+Alarm\s+Panel\s+75\s+Meters\/False\s+Alarms\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Brad Roope" <w1rq@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:33:04 -0500
Hello: I am having a problem with a new DSC Alarm Panel recently installed at my next door neighbors QTH. On 75 meters with more that 400 hundred watts causes the false alarms being sent to alarm cen
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00039.html (7,764 bytes)

2. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:16:26 -0600
Common split cores are optimized for 50 MHz and us, and would not be expected to be effective at 4 MHz. Your tone sounds defensive -- it should not be. DSC is the guy with the problem, and THEY shoul
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00040.html (10,205 bytes)

3. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:06:27 -0500
This raises a question I have wondered about. Years ago, I had interference to a stereo that originated with the speaker leads. Not knowing any better, I went to Radio Shack and got a couple of RF ch
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00041.html (12,047 bytes)

4. [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: Jpaleng@cs.com
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:55:09 EST
The usual problem is RF pickup on the long sensor lines. Several of our customers have had success by putting split beads on these lines right at the electronics box. Our largest is 1/2" hole but you
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00042.html (6,913 bytes)

5. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: Martin Ewing <martin@aa6e.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:58:07 -0800 (PST)
I think the big issue here is not how to fix the RFI problem. (The RFC/cap approach might well work, or ferrites, or twisted pair.) But it's who's responsible. If you start doing the alarm company's
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00043.html (14,770 bytes)

6. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:25:21 -0600
It depends on how the RF is getting in. If it is a pin 1 problem, it probably would not fix it. If it was differential mode, it probably would. To understand why, I'll review what "the pin 1 problem"
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00044.html (11,185 bytes)

7. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:27:07 -0500
Wouldn't the bypass capacitor to ground take care of pin 1 problems by making a good chassis connection at RF? I was just using ZIP cord for the speaker leads. Again, if this is low-speed data or DC,
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00045.html (12,209 bytes)

8. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:07:49 -0600
A bypass cap on the signal conductor to the chassis does not help a pin 1 problem. A bypass cap from the shield to the chassis may help, hurt, or not be enough. It would help by lowering the Z of the
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00046.html (9,810 bytes)

9. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: W6YN Don Milbury <w6yn@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:53:54 -0800
Definitely! Here in California it would be illegal for you to touch another persons electronics to offer repairs. You must be licensed by the State of California to legally provide the service that y
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00047.html (8,211 bytes)

10. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Cortland Richmond" <ka5s@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:59:26 -0800
9802. This chapter does not apply to: (a) Any employee of a service dealer while the employee is engaged in activities within the normal scope of the employer's business. (b) The repair, service, or
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00048.html (9,391 bytes)

11. Re: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: W6YN Don Milbury <w6yn@juno.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:55:24 -0800
Thanks for your help with the conformation of my point. 73, Don, W6YN http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=09001-100 00& _______________________________________________ RFI
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00049.html (9,155 bytes)

12. RE: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "EDWARDS, EDDIE J" <eedwards@oppd.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 07:58:39 -0600
Not that it matters to me (not in CA), but this seems to confirm that hams should not touch any neighbor's equipment, but he can still work on his own ham equipment. Letter (c) is as clear as mud, bu
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00050.html (10,365 bytes)

13. RE: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Cortland Richmond" <ka5s@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:19:41 -0800
Basically, it appears that Califonia requires anyone who holds himself out as a provider of a service in a number of fields to be licensed by the State. This reduces the number of fly-by-night operat
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00051.html (10,598 bytes)

14. RE: [RFI] DSC Alarm Panel 75 Meters/False Alarms (score: 1)
Author: "Cortland Richmond" <ka5s@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:33:03 -0800
Meant to say... (corrected text): _______________________________________________ RFI mailing list RFI@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
/archives//html/RFI/2004-11/msg00052.html (8,236 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu