Rule creation help

[dean830]

Hi All

I would like to make the following rule but haven't had any success in the variations I have tried.

If - System is alarming (any)
And system becomes disarmed or alarm is acknowledged
Then send email to email 10

Essentially if a false alarm occurs and the system is reset I want the system to send another text. I have tried several variables of disarmed and arming or becomes disarmed but none seem to work.

Thanks in advance

 

[RAL]

Rules trigger at the moment when an event happens, such as the alarm going off, or the system going from armed to disarmed state.  That is, a change of state takes place. The change-of-state condition needs to be the first thing that the rule tests. So you can't have a rule that says "If System is alarming".  That's a state, not a change from one state to another.  You are trying to write a rule that captures two events that happen at different times: the alarm going off, and the system being disarmed. 
 
One solution is to break things down into multiple rules that catch the change of state, and use phantom outputs to "remember" that the other condition exists.
 
For example,
 
WHENEVER ANY ALARM ANY AREA TURNS ON
THEN TURN OUTPUT 190 ON                    This remembers that the system is in alarm state
 
WHENEVER AREA 1 ARM STATE BECOMES DISARMED
AND OUTPUT 190 IS ON
THEN SEND EMAIL MESSAGE 1 TO EMAIL 1
THEN TURN OUTPUT 190 OFF
 
[edit]:
 
You might also be able to do it this way. I forgot that you can test for an alarm being active in an AND clause.  So the trigger is the change of state from armed to disarmed, and the secondary (AND) condition is that the system was already in the alarm state.
 
 
WHENEVER AREA 1 ARM STATE BECOMES DISARMED
AND ANY ALARM ANY AREA IS ACTIVE
THEN SEND EMAIL MESSAGE 1 TO EMAIL 1

 

[dean830]

HI RAL

Thanks for the reply. I will give the first option a try tonight and see how it works. I think your description of how rules work is accurate as to why my programming failed.

I attempted to do your second option when I was programming and it didn't seem to work. I will try it again as well. Will let you know & thanks again.

 

[RAL]

HI RAL

Thanks for the reply. I will give the first option a try tonight and see how it works. I think your description of how rules work is accurate as to why my programming failed.

I attempted to do your second option when I was programming and it didn't seem to work. I will try it again as well. Will let you know & thanks again.

 
I think the second method may not work as a single rule for the following reason:  The rule triggers when the system changes from armed to disarmed state.  The AND clause is evaluated a moment later, and when it checks to see if an alarm is currently active, it evaluates to FALSE because disarming the system took it out of alarm state and the condition is no longer valid.
 
By using an output to remember that the system was in alarm state, it allows the condition to carry over and evaluate correctly even after the alarm is disarmed.