Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

24/7 HR Sampling

philippe.berini
over 9 years ago
I thought I'll put that topic in an own thread. Many people have the perception that Garmin reduced the HR sampling frquency as of FW 3.20. And to many this topic seems very important, yet so much 24/7 HR was one of the main reasons to get that watch.

Discussion about this started in the FW 3.20 thread around here: https://forums.garmin.com/showthread.php?337137-FR235-Firmware-updates-v3-20-and-v2-30-quot-Sensor-Hub-quot-(2015-12-09)&p=770858#post770858

My last post there about this was: https://forums.garmin.com/showthread.php?337137-FR235-Firmware-updates-v3-20-and-v2-30-quot-Sensor-Hub-quot-(2015-12-09)&p=771434#post771434

I will post my upcoming findings about this topic here from now on.

The first "result" I might have found: When moving around continiously the HR is read every 10 minutes.

From the last two nights of sleep I would guess so far, that when not moving much HR is being read about twice an hour. I suppose Garmin has implemented some algorythm that reduce "time to next sample" based on movements/steps being registered.

Note that this is just what I see my watch is doing, me registering time and step count when a reading happens.

After I stopped moving around, the next reading came 20 mins later, having made 60 steps in between.


Please feel welcome to post your own findings, graphs etc about allday HR here...
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    I don't get it

    I don't understand the complaints here on the sampling rates. I'm 100% ok having the watch sample at different intervals based on movement. No way do I want to go back to 3.1 where the battery life was terrible. The new software is perfect for my needs.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 9 years ago
    I don't understand the complaints here on the sampling rates. I'm 100% ok having the watch sample at different intervals based on movement. No way do I want to go back to 3.1 where the battery life was terrible. The new software is perfect for my needs.


    Which is why Garmin should make the sampling rate adjustable by the user. Surely it can't be too difficult to add as an option?
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    Which is why Garmin should make the sampling rate adjustable by the user. Surely it can't be too difficult to add as an option?


    Agreed. Just add a "continuous" mode to go along with the "off" and "automatic".
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    Well if you really wanted to record/analyse your HR every second you could always start the timer in Run Indoor mode (to save battery burn with GPS being on) ...
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    Well if you really wanted to record/analyse your HR every second you could always start the timer in Run Indoor mode (to save battery burn with GPS being on) ...


    Sure, but for a device that is marketed as having 24/7 HR monitoring that shouldn't be necessary.
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    Has anybody actually found an actual purpose to monitor your HR 24x7 - which of course it does - they just do not specify a sampling rate.

    As I run pretty every day anyway what my HR does is in the activity itself seems far more relevant to me. Other than that I find myself just trying to revalidate what my lowest RHR is and, so far, it has been more or less what I expect it to be.
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    Has anybody actually found an actual purpose to monitor your HR 24x7 - which of course it does - they just do not specify a sampling rate.

    As I run pretty every day anyway what my HR does is in the activity itself seems far more relevant to me. Other than that I find myself just trying to revalidate what my lowest RHR is and, so far, it has been more or less what I expect it to be.


    Same for me. It seems to catch increases when I go up stairs or walk the dog, and I get roughly the same RHR as when I check it manually or with a BP device as soon as I wake up.

    Other than RHR being able to gauge how hard my runs are is my biggest use for having HR on the watch.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 9 years ago
    Has anybody actually found an actual purpose to monitor your HR 24x7 - which of course it does - they just do not specify a sampling rate.

    As I run pretty every day anyway what my HR does is in the activity itself seems far more relevant to me. Other than that I find myself just trying to revalidate what my lowest RHR is and, so far, it has been more or less what I expect it to be.


    As per a previous post in another thread:



    OK, here is my answer and it mainly relates to calorie burn. 9 months ago I bought a Fitbit HR to track steps and calories. This information is fed into myfitnessPal where I record food eaten. By targeting a certain calories deficit I have managed to lose 25 Kg since then and I am now nearly at a healthy weight. If you look at the attached example of a Fitbit trace you can see it is fairly granular as it samples every 5 seconds. If I get up and walk around for a bit you can see the HR rises and calorie burn increases. It is a motivator and genuinely useful health tool. For overnight you can see there are changes in HR. It may be only a few BPM but this info can be used for RHR. Now if you compare this to a Garmin 235 chart then its the other end of the scale. A 5 minute activity could be missed if sampling is low and RHR could be a few BPM out.

    So why did I buy a Garmin in the first place? Well the Fitbit is not that accurate in certain activities and can take a long time to lock onto the HR. You could say the Garmin is having these issues also as perhaps do all Optical HR monitors, BUT the unique selling point is the ability to attach a strap when you want to such as interval training. I.e. you have the best of both worlds.

    However a (apparently) very low sampling rate could be making HR and calorie burn inaccurate outside of activity recordings making it a poor activity tracker. For those people that see this watch as a step up from their Fitbit Surge and HR with better optical tracking and ability to pair a strap then the low HR sampling is a major disappointment, especially considering the cost. If there was an alternative right now then I think a lot more would be returned. Unfortunately it appears that Garmin Customer service don't seem to "get it" with regards to the tracking. Unfortunately in the UK there is normally no option to try before you buy. If you use it you can't return it.

    Of course there are a lot of people who are just data geeks and like to monitor things like this! :-)

    Hope that helps?

    To you this is a running watch. To others the 24*7 tracking is just as if not more important. You may find this hard to believe but I don't actually run outdoors, I prefer to cycle for which I use my Edge 1000. My intention was to use (When Father Christmas delivers my watch on the 25th) the 235 for fitness tracking, indoor running, stationary bike and general cross training with the option to wear a band when optical HR wasn't working too well (Weights/interval training). I would like everything to be in one place. I.e. GC, but the potential inaccuracy in the tracking has me (and it seems lots of others) concerned. With this watch Garmin has the potential for a flexible multipurpose watch with good running features. They just need to listen to its users regarding the tracking element.
  • 0 over 9 years ago
    Good answer Paul !

    Out of interest how much fluctuation in estimate calorie burn do you get from the Fitbit in days when you "get up and walk around for a bit" quite a lot versus a more stationary day?

    You are right that my "needs" with a watch like this as a runner of over 30 years standing are undoubtedly different to some other 235 owners. Can a watch marketed as a runner's watch cater for a more general audience? Not sure. Hopefully you will soon be able to tell us.