Glass breaks, thunderstorms and HA (was Re: Help with 7 Circuit Project?)

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Robert L Bass" <robertlbass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8NednWEOHZjl90HfRVn-gQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Of course, human activity is what alarms
> > are looking for in the first place, so
> > whenever you start limiting the system,
> > you're increasing the chances that a true
> > alarm WON'T be reported.
>
> In this case it's the activity of humans who live at the protected
premises
> that causes most problems.  I try to set systems up so that the homeowner
is
> unlikely to accidentally trip an alarm.  That usually means deactivating
> ("shunting") interior motion detectors and glass break detectors when the
> family is home until they retire for the night.

Well, that's certainly a common practice in the industry.  Even so, I've
triggered such systems inadvertently at least 4 or 5 times, once waking up
an entire household.  It's just too easy to forget about the alarm when
letting the cat out or taking the garbage out or running after the FedEx
guy.  Even though those systems had an inside sounder to let you know you
had just tripped the system, you can't hear it when outside trying to get
that last bag of stinky kitchen garbage out to the curb as the trucks
approach.

The point I was trying to make, however, is that burglary is a human
activity, usually occurring from the outside to the inside.  Perhaps the
solution is to extend the alarm's sensing range to the lot perimeter.
Unless the burglar parachutes in, he's going to have to cross ground before
getting to the house.

> >> The IntelliSense (now part of Honeywell)
> >> detectors I use only occasionally false if
> >> the storm is intense and directly overhead.
> >> With a panel like the ELK M1Gold there's
> >> a way you could configure the glass breaks
> >> to be "lightning proof".  When thunder
> >> triggers glass breaks it usually trips several
> >> of them.
> >
> > Usually, but not always in my experience.
>
> If only one triggers the alarm signal is sent.  Only if multiple detectors
> trip in rapid sequence do you want to ignore glass breaks.

I'll bet that will cover most of the falsing problems but we've had two
hurricanes and a tornado pass through here in the last couple of years.
Debris from such an even will trigger multiple glass break.  Using the timer
method would give a pretty erroneous reading of what's going on.  The answer
to me seems clear.  Alarm systems really needs to know more about the
current conditions than they do now.  Falsing is a nationwide plague.  Part
of the reason is that commercial alarm panels are fairly stupid when it
comes to determining whether an alarm is false or not.

> > The trick here is to figure out what the
> > weather conditions are independently
> > of the intrusion sensors and then bias
> > their reports accordingly.  Now I'm not
> > sure this means a using a lightning
> > detector of some sort, or monitoring the
> > NWS via the net (or better yet, by radio)
> > or what, but clearly an "ultra smart"
> > alarm system would take the weather
> > into account.
>
> To effectively decide when to ignore a condition based on weather you
would
> need a panel that simply does not yet exist.

I didn't expect to find such a panel off-the-shelf.  But I'm pretty sure the
sophisticated ones like the Elk and the HAI can be made more aware of their
surroundings, even if it requires a separate HA controller and sensors like
the Ocelot and their Bobcats to make the determination.

> It's good to dream of ways to  improve things in the future,
> but we have to deal with the present, using
> technology that is available today.

Take a look at Dr. Cheung's system.  His house *knows* a lot more than any
COTS solution will provide.  It's doable.

IF rain sensors = wet AND all intercoms spike simultaneously AND the NWS
download indicates "Stormy Weather" AND barometric pressure detector =
"probable storm" THEN don't send alarm on glass break detection ALONE.  I've
seen TV weathermen show local maps of lightning hits.  While I am not sure
how I could obtain and reliable feed that info to my HA/alarm system, I'm
betting something like that is possible.  The question is, will it be
reliable?

> > We have a large apartment house nearby
> > with a large, outside parking lot.  It's
> > bordered by open parkland and is the
> > only structure above 10 stories for a
> > radius of 10 miles.  When there's a severe
> > storm, a building hit will set off anywhere
> > from 1 to 5 different car alarms...
>
> I don't really deal with car alarms.  Most are useless junk.

Just added that story as an aside.  Getting an alarm company or the police
to respond during a storm is probably going to be pretty hard just because
they've experienced the parking lot/storm scenario a thousand times.   When
I helped the neighbor with the homicidal ex-husband she had an alarm
installed right before a hurricane swept through.  I camped out with her in
the dark with my good friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson because had
hammer-killer decided to come and kill her during the hurricane, no one
would have noticed.  The system did, in fact, go off and the alarm company
never even called.  That's when she called me and my little friends.

> >> Have the glass break zones start a timer.
> >> If any glass break zone is tripped wait 10
> >> seconds before triggering an alarm.  If a
> >> second glass break activates within that
> >> time frame, take no action.
> >
> > That's certainly one approach.  It's based on
> > a burglar only smashing one window, which
> > is probably a pretty good assumption.
>
> Not one window -- one window within range of a single detector.  Glass
> breaks are not designed to protect multiple rooms.  Typically, there is
one
> detector per room and each is (or really ought to be) on a separate zone
> (sensing circuit).  I've yet to see a situation where the thief broke
> windows in separate rooms within a 10-second interval.

What - you've never seen "Scarface?"  What if the army they sent to kill him
came to the wrong house?  :-)

> > As a Floridian, you must be aware of
> > what happened after Andrew.  There
> > were a *lot* of burglars smashing a
> > *lot* of windows!
>
> TTBOMK, noone was smashing lots of windows in different rooms of a single
> home in rapid succession.  However, after Andrew hit there were large
> numbers of homes without power for weeks.

After Andrew there was widespread looting and places where even the National
Guard would not patrol because the residents out-armed them 20 to 1.   I
want to design an alarm system that's frugal enough with power to run for at
least a week, even with the main AC power down.  That can be partially
achieved by using a high capacity, deep-cycle wheelchair battery.  But it's
going to require a lot of careful design and current measurements to be sure
it will run that long.

Why do I want this?  Because I've been without power for many days at a time
around here.  Even though I went to stay with relatives nearby, I really
wasn't comfortable knowing that the 10 hour battery that came with the ADT
system was already dead.  I want something better than that kind of COTS
crap to protect my home.

> None of their security systems were working.  Also, phone lines
> were down so many alarms weren't able to call the central station.

I wouldn't count on thieves to know that.  I would count on them going down
the street if a loud siren managed to sound once they forced my door open or
smashed a window.  That kind of protection is NOT outside the bounds of
current technology.  It's just going to take some engineering to design,
assemble and test.

> You can't really build a commercially successful alarm or automation
control
> that will handle earthquakes, hurricanes, forest fires or riots.  It's
also
> highly unlikely that we'll see an affordable HA system that makes
processing
> decisions based on lightning proximity any time soon.

I've never been one to care much about what's commercially available if I
know in my mind that it's technically feasible.  While I don't see much
payback in trying to design in earthquake alarms here in the NE, I DO see a
very strong need to have an alarm system that can ride out the long-term
power outages that occur here with increasing frequency and severity.

For the last 5 years, the local power company has slashed its tree-trimming
budget.  You can imagine the results.  They've been forced by local
authorities to put the trimmers back to work because a recent, rather mild
storm knocked out thousands of area houses for up to a week.

> For now, the best we  can do is use the tools that are currently
> available, mix in a bit of ingenuity and experience and come up
> with something that minimizes problems while affording a
> reasonable degree of comfort and security.

I agree.  But I also feel that if commercial panels are too stupid to know
if it's thunderstorming outside, someone better learn them.  Ask not for
whom the bell tolls and the siren sounds . . .

--
Bobby G.