I'm looking for information on the new Genie Safe-T-Beam sensor. Whatever frequency is used by the IR emitter and receiver.?

 

Standard IR frequency is 38 kHz or 40 kHz.

 

I will remove the metal shield to see if a part number is visible. I will post a schematic as either a pdf or png file.

 

I don't see any metal shield.

 

In the photo of the assembly you can see the component designator "U1". The IR receiver is under a metal shield. You only see the top of that shield in my photo.
Am I allowed to post a pdf file?

 

This schematic was reverse engineered and may have errors.

 

Schematic update:
The zener diode, D3, is 5.1 volts.
At 12 volts DC, the circuit draws 7 ma with no IR signal. No part number found on the IR receiver, U1.

 

If the sensor has three legs on it, then it likely already has 38 kHz detection circuit.
VS1838 or TL1838 is a popular IR sensor.



http://eeshop.unl.edu/pdf/VS1838-Infrared-Receiver-datasheet.pdf

 

Revised schematic

 

Please delete all previous versions of this schematic.

 

Here is the schematic of the older version of the Safe-T-Beam transmitter and receiver.

 

In the photo of the assembly you can see the component designator "U1". The IR receiver is under a metal shield. You only see the top of that shield in my photo.
Am I allowed to post a pdf file?

PDF is a preferred file format!! and JPG works also.

 

PDF is a preferred file format!! and JPG works also.

Actually, while PDF is certainly allowed it is certainly not preferred for posting images. JPEGs can be viewed inline, not needing a separate reader application or a(n explicit) download. JPEGs have a much smaller attack surface when considering cybersecurity because the viewer is the browser and they lack special features that might be exploited. They will also be smaller, lacking the useless overhead of a PDF, though that doesn't matter too much lately.

So, posting PDFs is fine—but for images a JPEG is friendlier.

 

Actually, while PDF is certainly allowed it is certainly not preferred for posting images. JPEGs can be viewed inline, not needing a separate reader application or a(n explicit) download. JPEGs have a much smaller attack surface when considering cybersecurity because the viewer is the browser and they lack special features that might be exploited. They will also be smaller, lacking the useless overhead of a PDF, though that doesn't matter too much lately.

So, posting PDFs is fine—but for images a JPEG is friendlier.

OK, and thanks. I had not considered that. Very good points you make!