Re: Wireless Motion Detector Recommendations...

[Crash Gordon® <NONE@xxxxxxxx>]

"..under eaves.." You're using this stuff outside??


"CatMan" <liberaltrash@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message =
news:wuWdndp5v50Sw_zfRVn-1Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Very good response rabsparks. I have a question: As a consultant, have =
you=20
> ever come across the requirement to filter or de-sensitize a PIR? =
Reason I=20
> ask is I am using a combination of Visonic PIR's and X10 MS13A's. I =
know, I=20
> know - the X10 stuff is you get what you pay for. However, by=20
> experimentation with mounting/aiming them, they have become fairly =
accurate.=20
> The X-10 and Visonic PIR's do false on bright sunny days even though I =
have=20
> them mounted under eves. I am fairly sure some of the problem is UV =
light=20
> that may be setting them off. I have used tape to block part of the =
lens'=20
> coverage but that didn't really work. I have read somewhere that =
people have=20
> used some type of filter material that either passes only IR light or=20
> filters out UV light. DO you think this would be possible?
>=20
> I found a few photography web sites that discuss creating an IR =
passing=20
> filter using un-exposed developed IR film. I have not tried this yet =
but=20
> plan to do. I also found a web site that sells UV filter material made =
from=20
> clear colorless polyester film. DO you think this may work? Maybe =
using just=20
> common window tinting material may work.
>=20
> Ideas?
>=20
> Comments?
>=20
> Thanks!
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> <rabsparks@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message=20
> news:1113668292.196876.193510@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > crabbs wrote:
> >> I'm looking at the DSC and Ademco wireless motion detectors, but =
they
> > seem
> >> pretty expensive  ($80-$150). Is this what I should expect to pay =
or
> > is
> >> there a decent alternative for a bit less that's compatible with a
> > DSC 864?
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> BTW, what does PIR stand for and why are some detectors PIR and =
some
> > not?
> >
> > First of all, often times in security you get what you pay for. =
Buying
> > an inexpensive device and you might well be buying yourself a "false
> > alarm generator" (a sensor that's so poorly designed that you are
> > besieged with what most people call "false" alarms (actually a =
"false
> > alarm" is an alarm generated by the device's electronics without
> > outside stimulation while a "nuisance alarm" is an alarm caused by =
an
> > outside stimulus other than an intruder.)
> >
> >>From your question, it sounds as if you're an end-user and not a
> > dealer, installer or consultant. That puts you at a significant
> > disadvantage in working out which sensor phenomenology is best. In
> > addition to PIR, you could also have: microwave, ultrasonic, active =
IR,
> > seismic/pressure, impact/glass break, video motion detection, et
> > cetera.
> >
> > Each sensor phenomenology has its strong and weak points. Therefore =
one
> > sensor type may be used in one room while another type might best be
> > suited for another room. Since you apparently don't have experience
> > necessary to determine which sensor phenomenology (not to mention =
which
> > sensor types react to various room conditions), you're taking on a
> > quite a bit yourself.
> >
> > If you're simply replacing a sensor installed by someone who has =
that
> > experience, then that's one thing. And you can probably simply =
replace
> > the defective sensor, making certain that you keep the exact =
location
> > as the one you're replacing and set the sensitivity at the same =
level.
> > But if you're adding to your existing system, i'd suggest that you =
find
> > a qualified alarm installer in your area and let him/her make sure =
that
> > you're not going to have trouble with the new sensor, its type (PIR,
> > glassbreak, etc), its location, and sources of nuisance alarms in =
the
> > room/area.
> >
> > Now right about now, you're thinking, "He's an installer: what else
> > would he recommend?" Wrong. I am a consultant and do not provide
> > equipment to my clients. There's a lot more to selecting sensors to
> > meet specific conditions than one might think.
> >
> > rick
> >=20
>=20
>