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

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 Former Member over 9 years ago

Has anybody else noticed a big discrepancy in the HR 4hr plot (on the watch) vs the plot for the same time in GC or app? Are the HR samples post processed online vs raw on the watch?

0 philippe.berini over 9 years ago

Has anybody else noticed a big discrepancy in the HR 4hr plot (on the watch) vs the plot for the same time in GC or app? Are the HR samples post processed online vs raw on the watch?

yes, sometimes it seems that the graph in GC is a few hours behind....

Anybody else tried with HR broadcasting on yet? I seem to be seeing a lot more points today (with this on a fair bit) compared to previous days.

yes, though didn't look at the files ever since. but the graph looks more like when you do a training....

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

5017

Anybody else tried with HR broadcasting on yet? I seem to be seeing a lot more points today (with this on a fair bit) compared to previous days.

Mine has been running in this mode since midnight last night apart from when I Did a cycle ride when I used my edge 1000. HR chart seems waaaay better! Battery down to about 70 percent.
Shouldn't have to do this. PLEASE GARMIN GIVE US THE OPTION OF HIGHER SAMPLING RATES! Most of the comments in the suggestions thread want this.

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

Here is a comparison of the two modes when sleeping.

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

Here is a comparison of the two modes when sleeping.

Looks like this is what we need to do until they fix it.

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

Looks like this is what we need to do until they fix it.

Genuine question though: what is the difference in the estimated RHR?

I love my fitbit Charge HR (which has now been replaced by my 235) which does a great job at the 24/7 monitoring and making such detailed graphs. But after a few weeks the novelty wore off and I wasn't really looking at the wiggly HR curves anymore, just the aggregate numbers. There I found the actionable information (fitness changes, getting sick, signs of over training, ...).

With the 235, *IF* 24/7 HR is not used to calculate calories, and *IF* the daily RHR numbers are the same, what have we lost by having a lower sampling?

0 timgrose over 9 years ago

Mine has been running in this mode since midnight last night apart from when I Did a cycle ride when I used my edge 1000. HR chart seems waaaay better! Battery down to about 70 percent.
Shouldn't have to do this. PLEASE GARMIN GIVE US THE OPTION OF HIGHER SAMPLING RATES! Most of the comments in the suggestions thread want this.

I think the "problem" is that with this mode on during the night and doing one long run with GPS in the day that my battery was almost flat having started from full charge before going to bed. I tend to charge every day anyway (out of habit) but if clearly if you want to monitor 24x7 HR like this be prepared to recharge daily.

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

I think the "problem" is that with this mode on during the night and doing one long run with GPS in the day that my battery was almost flat having started from full charge before going to bed. I tend to charge every day anyway (out of habit) but if clearly if you want to monitor 24x7 HR like this be prepared to recharge daily.

TIMGROSE is correct, although for me it is more like 75% battery used although no GPS or alerts were used. BUT, using broadcast rate is the other extreme to what we are getting in normal 24*7 mode it seems. We need the option of a happy medium. For me a 3 day battery life is acceptable with a good 24*7 monitoring.

Now whether this is giving a measurable difference in RHR is hard to tell. MY RHR in that example was higher than it normally is primarily due to the alcohol and Christmas food that I had consumed not long before going to bed! :-)

0 timgrose over 9 years ago

Overnight it was similar battery drain but then I went for a 20 mile run :)

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

Out of interest does anyone know how the 235 calculates calories burnt in 24*7 mode? Is it steps, HR or both?

Compared to my Fitbit HR, calories burn't is way down compared to the Fitbit... I need to do some investigation to find out why.