New to home security and have questions for a new install

[ivan747]

I am new to home security but about choked at the price quoted by ADT so here I am. Our main objectives are home security and video surveillance with home automation being secondary. The primary automation that we'd like to do immediately is with the thermostat. The house is about 20 years old and is not wired for security so I'm planning to go wireless for everything except possibly the exterior video cameras. I would prefer not to go with a proprietary protocol but am willing to bend if it's the right way to go. We plan to build a workshop/garage about 40 feet from our house in the near future and would like to include this in the same security, surveillance and automation setup if possible. If it's practical, I'd like to have the main controls be in the master bedroom so they can be controlled at night for security reasons to check sensors, video, etc. I'm not against having a computer running full time to do one or more parts of the overall system. We primarily use smart phones for phone service. We do not have a traditional landline. We do have phone service through our cable service but we've never used it. It was just a part of the package. We would like to have the system remotely monitored by a professional company. We would also like to receive alerts when certain things happen that don't necessarily trigger an alarm with the monitoring service, such as the kids going into an off limits room. We would like to be able to remotely view the cameras and check sensors.

Security
We have 3 doors, 7 windows and 2 garage doors to cover. Smoke, heat, glass breakage, PIR in at least two areas.

Video
I'm not looking for a hi def image. I just want to be able to see what's going on along each side of the house and in the pool area. Being able to do identification of people is secondary to seeing what they are doing. Night time viewing would be a major plus for the security aspect. I would prefer wireless if possible. I would most likely have to hire the wiring done if wireless is not practical. I think I'd like to have a DVR system that can handle 8 to 12 cameras eventually, if that's possible.

Automation
I'd like to have control of the thermostat immediately and add things as we go. Exterior lights would probably early in the list for security reasons.

I've been doing reading here and it seems that an ElkM1 might do everything I need. But I'm not sure about the video part. I've also read that a DSC system with Homeseer might be a better way to go for future automation possibilities. Are there other/better options? I'm open to any and all suggestions. I'm a software developer so doing some programming to get a system working does not bother me but I don't have to spend all my free time tweaking this and that to keep a system working correctly. Thanks for your help.

robert

 

[tmbrown97]

There's a lot to cover here, and I won't get to all of it... but a few points... If you choked at the ADT price, that's likely not going to get much better, especially since you have to go all wireless. Wireless is 10X the price of wired.

An Elk or an Omni will be your most powerful options... a DSC can get close with a different central controller, but I can't imagine it ever being *better* than an Elk or Omni. 2Gig is another option since you're 100% wireless... it has a handful of easy peripherals, such as Thermostats, etc...

Video will most likely be a separate system; depending on the combination of systems, you may be able to get the video to display on a touchscreen, but there's a lot of variables (using a controller like CQC or Homeseer can do a lot more than the panels' own touchscreens).

You'll be able to do anything you want with the detached garage; just make sure you run some conduit between there and the house; think about ethernet, a handful of spare pairs for whatever else (maybe a few Cat6 cables), and cover the security aspect. It's easy to run a sub-panel off an Elk out there which would let you add keypads, input expanders, relay expanders, etc - very versatile.

Thermostat is a cinch with either system.

 

[apostolakisl]

ADT is going to hit you real hard on the monitoring. Even if you spend the same on an install, you will start saving huge when you're only paying $9/mo monitoring instead of $50 or whatever ADT is getting nowdays.

Both Elk and Omni are very good for the DIY home automation/security. Both support a myriad of peripherals both self branded and otherwise. Elk is a little more build your system in modules where Omni tends to have more out of the box.

You should look into doing as much as you can with wires as possible. If you have an attic or basement with access to wall spaces above/below, I would suggest pulling wires. Certainly pulling wires to everthing is possible, you just have to balance out your time and effort against the lower material costs, lower maintenance, and probably better reliability of wired.

 

[ivan747]

Thanks for the replies. ADT wanted $57 a month for monitoring with GSM. For 3 door sensors, one PIR and one camera, they wanted $650 for installation and labor. It won't take too long to break even by doing my own system. I'm not sure I'd be very good at pulling wires and affording an electrician is not really an option. Maybe I'm thinking that wire pulling is much more complicated than it really is. I'll do some looking on that. Thanks again for the replies.

robert

 

[apostolakisl]

Quality monitoring plus GSM minutes combined can be had for about $18 per month. So you can figure $39/month savings or close to $500/yr. So I would say you could budget in a 2 year ROI and buy $1600 system. That will get you a lot of toys considering how relatively small your system is. You will need to hardwire your smokes so you pulling at least some wire is a must. You may or may not be interested in following code but you need one per bedroom, one in any common area outside of a bedroom with a minimum of one per floor. Dropping wire into ceiling smoke detectors from an attic is not hard work. Getting into door frames and windows frames is a lot more complex. Motion detectors and glass breaks are also not terribly hard to wire on interior walls provided you have access from above or below. So maybe look at only doing wireless on your door and window contacts.

 

[Del91574]

Lou,
For clarification:
Nowhere is he required to install hardwired smoke detectors, even in a new outbuilding, provided it does not contain "habitable" space or sleeping areas. The only time a person may be forced to add some is during a renovation of existing habitable space, addition of habitable space or when the percentage of new vs. old work for the entire renovation/remodel job hits a certain level. The only time someone may be required to put any form of detection in an outbuilding, not designed for habitable space, is when the code is more stringent by the AHJ or if required by an insurer.

The only item you would really need to hardwire no matter what manufacturer, would be the keypad(s) for any system you choose. After that, wiring to a t-stat would open up the possibilities for more hardware rather than being forced into the wireless communication format(s) that the host system supports. For an outbuilding, the only reliable and bulletproof option for automation and security, barring specific panel selections, would be to wire back to the main panel.

Video, and the ability to get any quality views or hardware, the only real option is hardwired. If cabling is of a concern and analog cameras are to be used, then baluns can be used on twisted pair instead of coax, since we're really not talking any real distance here.

 

[apostolakisl]

Lou,
For clarification:
Nowhere is he required to install hardwired smoke detectors, even in a new outbuilding, provided it does not contain "habitable" space or sleeping areas. The only time a person may be forced to add some is during a renovation of existing habitable space, addition of habitable space or when the percentage of new vs. old work for the entire renovation/remodel job hits a certain level. The only time someone may be required to put any form of detection in an outbuilding, not designed for habitable space, is when the code is more stringent by the AHJ or if required by an insurer.

The only item you would really need to hardwire no matter what manufacturer, would be the keypad(s) for any system you choose. After that, wiring to a t-stat would open up the possibilities for more hardware rather than being forced into the wireless communication format(s) that the host system supports. For an outbuilding, the only reliable and bulletproof option for automation and security, barring specific panel selections, would be to wire back to the main panel.

Video, and the ability to get any quality views or hardware, the only real option is hardwired. If cabling is of a concern and analog cameras are to be used, then baluns can be used on twisted pair instead of coax, since we're really not talking any real distance here.

Yeah, I know that is why I wrote "you may or may not be interested in following code". However, if you are going to the trouble of installing smoke detectors, I would highly suggest following code. Or at least comming as close to code as possible when you run into big time obstructions. When it comes time to resell your property, the inspector will ding you for not following code. While it is not exactly a big deal, the buyer may be turned off by too many violations, especially on life safety issues.

But the main deal here is that the OP specifically stated he was going to install smokes on his new security panel. Perhaps they make wireless smokes, but I sure as heck would never put one in my house.

 

[Sandpiper]

Regarding wireless/wired smokes.......I have previously worked for two different national alarm companies- each with different philosphies on smokes. Both companies did agree on this point.....that whatever smokes were installed onto their system are supplemental to the "code compliant" system which should already be installed in the home. In most homes, this would be the 120VAC powered "builder" smokes. Requirements for the "code compliant" system depends on when the home was built or remodeled. So an older home may have no detectors, one detector, or only a handful and still be "code compliant". An owner always has an option to bring his home up to current code, but he can also choose just to supplement the "code compliant" system.

When we installed supplemental smokes, one national alarm company would only install wired smokes, and never wireless. The other was the other way around....only wireless and never wired. Either are OK as supplemental devices. But neither company would install the full "code compliant" system.....too many liability issues.

 

[apostolakisl]

Regarding wireless/wired smokes.......I have previously worked for two different national alarm companies- each with different philosphies on smokes. Both companies did agree on this point.....that whatever smokes were installed onto their system are supplemental to the "code compliant" system which should already be installed in the home. In most homes, this would be the 120VAC powered "builder" smokes. Requirements for the "code compliant" system depends on when the home was built or remodeled. So an older home may have no detectors, one detector, or only a handful and still be "code compliant". An owner always has an option to bring his home up to current code, but he can also choose just to supplement the "code compliant" system.

When we installed supplemental smokes, one national alarm company would only install wired smokes, and never wireless. The other was the other way around....only wireless and never wired. Either are OK as supplemental devices. But neither company would install the full "code compliant" system.....too many liability issues.

So if a home owner said "please install a system as per current code", they would do what? Say "no" and walk away? So "no" and then leave something off to purposefully be non-compliant? I don't understand how purposefully falling short of code limits liability. I would expect the exact opposite to be true.

I can understand supplementing code, but what if they walked inot a job that was non-code compliant even accounting for grandfathering? Say the home never was inspected or the original system was broken or removed? Would they walk away from that job?

Believe it or not, many industries love "codes" or having some industry society to define "best practices" or "standard of care". These things protect the entity performing the work since any challenge in court is easy to defend by showing that this is the standard and we followed it. (unless of course you didn't follow it).

 

[tmbrown97]

Not to speak for sandpiper, but I read that as - the alarm companies didn't want to be the ones installing the code-compliant system... They left that for the builder or another contractor... then they supplemented with a couple smokes as needed to alert the authorities.

One school of thought is that the reason for the interconnected smokes throughout and in each room is life safety - to wake everyone up and get them out with the fastest possible detection. The purpose of connecting them to your alarm panel is to alert authorities - most likely in situations where you're not home. If a bedroom goes up in flames and nobody is in it, the extra 20 seconds it takes for smoke to reach the further away alarm connected panel isn't putting lives in danger; and it'll still alert authorities faster than a neighbor seeing smoke would.

We've also seen the extensive discussions about what's right and wrong with system connected smokes on this forum - that alone is enough to make me not want to screw with the installed system, but just add 4 or so additional wireless smokes that connect to my panel specifically for the alert function listed above... but for getting my kids out of the house safely, I'm relying on the smokes in every room.

One additional thought for my case specifically - maybe DEL or Sandpiper or others have done this... my house has fire sprinklers and on the exterior there is a box with a light/siren - so there must be a flow switch in the fire sprinkler system... has anyone ever tapped into that system to trigger an input on the security system? I haven't been able to get the access door for the sprinkler controls open yet (never been opened since the house was built) so I don't know what sort of flow switch they used or if it has any extra contact terminals, etc... just wondering what standard practice would be around connecting to the sprinklers.

 

[Sandpiper]

So if a home owner said "please install a system as per current code", they would do what? Say "no" and walk away? So "no" and then leave something off to purposefully be non-compliant? I don't understand how purposefully falling short of code limits liability. I would expect the exact opposite to be true.

I can understand supplementing code, but what if they walked inot a job that was non-code compliant even accounting for grandfathering? Say the home never was inspected or the original system was broken or removed? Would they walk away from that job?

Believe it or not, many industries love "codes" or having some industry society to define "best practices" or "standard of care". These things protect the entity performing the work since any challenge in court is easy to defend by showing that this is the standard and we followed it. (unless of course you didn't follow it).

Yes. I was instructed to walk away when the customer asked for a full "code compliant" system. And I did on several occasions.....even for new homes under construction. Those companies do not want to be in the live-safety systems business, but only to supplement them. If they were to provide "code systems" to home owners, then the installing companies are obligated to insure all codes are followed completely, and provide proof of code compliance to the local authorities. Many alarm company local dealers typically are not staffed to do this, so the national companies take a stand not to provide that service, except in situations where the local staff can support this.

 

[apostolakisl]

Yes. I was instructed to walk away when the customer asked for a full "code compliant" system. And I did on several occasions.....even for new homes under construction. Those companies do not want to be in the live-safety systems business, but only to supplement them. If they were to provide "code systems" to home owners, then the installing companies are obligated to insure all codes are followed completely, and provide proof of code compliance to the local authorities. Many alarm company local dealers typically are not staffed to do this, so the national companies take a stand not to provide that service, except in situations where the local staff can support this.

Seems to me like there would be a lot of grey area in there and potential for misunderstanding. If you were adding detectors to a fully compliant home, that would be fairly striaght forward, but what if you were adding detectors to a home that was not already compliant? Seems like things could get dicey. To me, the way to handle not being liable for life safety in the fire detection business would be to avoid it all together.

It would be very easy for a lawyer to win a law suit against a professional alarm installer who installs a non-code fire safety device even with homeowner signed docs stating the facts. The lawyers could eat that one up putting the poor non-understanding howmowner with no prior knowledge against the big bad company who just wanted an easy buck.

 

[Sandpiper]

Let's just take a look at a national companies contract for example. Buried deep within you will find this:

16. SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS. IF THE ALARM SYSTEM INCLUDES SMOKE AND/OR CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS, I AGREE THAT: (A) THE NUMBER AND PLACEMENT OF SUCH DETECTORS MAY NOT FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS OR RECOMMENDATIONS IN CODES, LAWS OR STANDARDS THAT APPLY IN MY JURISDICTION, INCLUDING THE CODE PROVISIONS OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION AND THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE; ( B) I HAVE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLYING WITH ANY AND ALL CODES, LAWS AND STANDARDS THAT MAY APPLY TO THE
INSTALLATION, PLACEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ALARM SYSTEM; AND © ANY SMOKE AND/OR CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS DESCRIBED IN THIS CONTRACT ARE SUPPLEMENTAL DEVICES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE PART OF A PRIMARY FIRE ALARM OR CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION SYSTEM. I understand that ADT's electrical smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, if installed in my premises, are designed to be connected to an electrical power source. THESE DETECTORS WILL NOT OPERATE, THE ALARM WILL NOT SOUND AND THE ALARM SIGNAL WILL NOT BE TRANSMITTED WHEN: THE ELECTRICITY IS CUT OFF; THE BACK-UP BATTERY, IF INCLUDED AS PART OF THE SYSTEM, IS LOW OR DEAD; OR FIRE CUTS OFF THE ELECTRICITY BEFORE THE ALARM IS ACTIVATED, SOUNDS AND IS TRANSMITTED. Connecting these detectors to a separate dedicated electrical circuit may increase their reliability, but even dedicated circuits can fail. I understand that these detectors all have limited useful lives, after which time they will not function. It is my sole responsibility to monitor and replace all detectors before or at the end of their useful lives.

Notice the part about "supplemental devices only".

You can find the full contract here.

 

[Del91574]

The majority of home inspectors, while OK for what they do, are not typically credential holding contractors for trades, so they can only offer their opinion as far as what meets or does not meet code, and if a follow up was done by interested parties, that would provide any permitting information for improvements done to the property.

As Sandpiper said, if the property is not required to have smokes, or a minimum, which up until the 90's was only 1 per floor, then honestly, it is not required to bring the property up to present code. In a remodel circumstance, if the footprint is not being changed, most of the time, no additional detectors need to be installed. Note I said remodel and not renovation. Renovation entails having areas open/gutted and a percentage of new work vs. old. It would be unreasonable for a municipality or AHJ to require someone to bring a house up to present code for something like a kitchen/bath remodel or renovation, but change the percentage of work, or sometimes in our area, the dollar value, then it's not unreasonable.

With that said, I live next to two states that require very specific things related to the above statement. Any time a property is sold, the seller and/or new owner is required to install smoke detectors and CO detectors. The law is specific and allows battery operated (defined as portable) detectors to meet the requirement, however the legislature is still there. One state goes above that and requires any property being rented to have,at minimum, battery operated smoke and CO detectors be installed, however the laws do not prescribe maintenance and upkeep, but I would not want to personally open myself up to that liability for a few 9 volts.

I worked for a national also, and what Sand seems to describe sounds like a local policy, other than what is contained within the contract. We always installed smoke and CO to meet our building code and never had an issue, per se, of not meeting code unless more detectors were required or the dB level was not met. I can't say I've experienced the hardwired/wireless train of thought he has from those companies in his area.

I believe how that particular contract is written is to limit set damages from a salesperson that is not versed in code, let alone security hardware and installs. Follow that with a tech, that may or may not have a background in systems, but is hopefully licensed (big issues around here with large nationals) that says the customer is "all set". I believe that if push came to shove, even though it is in writing, that clause may be thrown out if the plaintiff's case or understanding of their system is reasonable and just, notwithstanding that at the end of the day, unless their property was inspected and engineered by a licensed fire protection engineer and NICET certified IV to boot, then it's the property owner and in some cases, insurer's responsibility to ensure the system meets all appropriate and enforceable codes in their juridstiction.

Work-
For your specific install, it would depend on if you have a dry or wet system, as it is possible you have a pressure switch and not a flow. Your supervisiory system must be isolated from the indicator, as that is a required system and monitoring supervisiory is not. Most switches I know of have multiple contacts on them, however you must make sure that the panel you are intending on connecting to is rated for fire supervision, not fire alarm, as the sprinkler/flow is supervisiory. Tamper connections would depend on your AHJ. Wiring method between the field wiring and the supervisiory switches must be done in a means to both protect the wire and not hinder maintenance and inspection of the system, which typically means running to a JB mounted in proximity and then moving to something like greenfield or sealtite to connect to the switch itself.

 

[Sandpiper]

.......
I worked for a national also, and what Sand seems to describe sounds like a local policy, other than what is contained within the contract. We always installed smoke and CO to meet our building code and never had an issue, per se, of not meeting code unless more detectors were required or the dB level was not met. I can't say I've experienced the hardwired/wireless train of thought he has from those companies in his area.........

Nope. This is from their monitoring contract used nationwide except for California. I'm quite sure this provision has been refined and jury-tested over the years.