System expansion - Window contact vs glass break vs motion det?

[ecborgoyn]

I'm in the middle of upgrading and expanding our security/safety system. I'm replacing a wired Westec 5000 panel with an Elk M1G (with all of the trimmings). The current system provides fairly good perimeter and interior coverage, but I'm thinking about augmentation.

Aversion to battery maintenance. Also an aversion to opening up walls to run cables. So I'd consider adding wireless window or door contacts where needed, but prefer wired expansion. I have no problems running additional cables in the basement, attic, and accessible walls.

Questions:

Do folks prefer glass break detectors? Window contacts? Both? Motion detectors? All-of-the-above? Obviously door/window contacts have the added benefit of an 'open' alerting. And I might be able to use the motion detectors to provide crude occupancy detection for automation purposes.

Are state-of-the-art glass break detectors reliable? Problems with false positives? Any performance differences between wall and ceiling mount units? Good/Bad brands and models? I have no specific budget and generally prefer high quality products at a 'reasonable' price point.

I have lots of options for wireless door/window contacts. Since I have NO existing wireless infrastructure, I can go down the Elk, GE, or Honeywell paths. Any words of wisdom? Are the battery life specs on the sensor data sheets accurate?

What about the concealed wireless windows/door contacts that are embedded into the frame. Any reliability issues? I see that in some cases the battery is NOT field replaceable and the entire switch assembly must be replaced. Comments? Do they really last 10 years as stated in some data sheets.

Thanks.

 

[wuench]

I have some wireless. The only advice i will give is make sure you get sensors where you can replace the battery. Battery life is not anywhere close to accurate, it may be for a brand new device right after it is manufactured but my experience has been that a lot of sensors sit on shelves for years, sometimes with the battery active and they fail at random times. I have had 10 year sensors fail after 1 or 2 years and 2 sensor come with such a weak signal they could not be detected 20 feet away from the reciever.

 

[video321]

To answer your question... all of the above for the reasons you mentioned. However, since you're doing wireless that throws a cost monkey wrench into the equation. I'd hold off and wait for the Elk wireless devices to come around, but simply put you're looking at a cost of ~25x what a wired system would run you. If you do want to have sensors on all the windows and don't want to run the wires yourself, I'd get a few quotes on getting the job done for you and compare that to a wireless system. Besides costs, wired contancts are much smaller so you have that WAF too. I retro-fitted all of my windows/doors and you wouldn't even know I was there B) As for the glassbreaks, I have the small 1" recessed Honeywell sensors and Haven't had a false yet since the system went in over 1 yr. ago - though I only use them in away mode.

 

[ecborgoyn]

Thanks for the information.

Do folks generally deploy BOTH glass-break detectors AND contacts for window protection?

The small (1" hole) Honeywell device look appealing. Biggest advantage is for wall mounted devices. Do folks see better performance when the detector microphone is directly 'watching' the windows, as opposed to a ceiling mounted device where the windows are off-axis?? In transducer and acoustic terms it would seem that on-axis would perform better. The effort to pull wires into walls vs. ceiling might be significantly different and I'm thinking through the tradeoffs.

The Honeywell FG- series look to have good specs...

We have windows with interior 'grills' that mimic divided-lite panes. These are DECORATIVE and not SECURITY grills. Most grills are plastic but some are wood. I would think that these grills could significantly alter the acoustic parameters of the pane being broken. Does anyone have any thoughts or data on this issue?? Also, the glass in our front door is triple glazed, where the interior/middle is a decorative 'stained glass' structure. Again, one wold think that this could significantly alter the acoustic profile. Any thoughts/data??

 

[video321]

Well, again, that is the reason to have a layered approach. Oh, and the Honeywll glassbreak can be mounted in a wall if you desire. As for protection, I use contacts and glassbreaks, but currently don't have more than that. I tried to setup motion but with multiple cats and the room layouts it really wasn't the best choice (even with cross-zone I felt there was too much risk of a false) so I looked into going with pulsors since I have choke points that would trigger them. Unfortunately, I never installed them yet. What I did do was install contacts on certain doors & cabinets that I new would attract attention and put them on a secondary zone to be armed in away mode. It includes our dresser, closet doors, office cabinets, A/V closet, etc. I figured I could always use those contacts for something - even a simple text when the house cleaner is there and the dresser drawer is opened.

 

[Del91574]

Thanks for the information.

Do folks generally deploy BOTH glass-break detectors AND contacts for window protection?

The small (1" hole) Honeywell device look appealing. Biggest advantage is for wall mounted devices. Do folks see better performance when the detector microphone is directly 'watching' the windows, as opposed to a ceiling mounted device where the windows are off-axis?? In transducer and acoustic terms it would seem that on-axis would perform better. The effort to pull wires into walls vs. ceiling might be significantly different and I'm thinking through the tradeoffs.

The Honeywell FG- series look to have good specs...

We have windows with interior 'grills' that mimic divided-lite panes. These are DECORATIVE and not SECURITY grills. Most grills are plastic but some are wood. I would think that these grills could significantly alter the acoustic parameters of the pane being broken. Does anyone have any thoughts or data on this issue?? Also, the glass in our front door is triple glazed, where the interior/middle is a decorative 'stained glass' structure. Again, one wold think that this could significantly alter the acoustic profile. Any thoughts/data??

The detector selection itself dictates what sort of glass and framed opening can be covered, as well as thickness. Some like the FG's allow off-axis placement, while others are designed to be more on-axis. The FG's pick up approximately an 8X10" piece of framed glass. The grilles make no difference as long as the framed glass is one piece instead of true divided lites.

Triple glazed windows effectively increase the thickness of the glass to the detector, so that needs to be taken into consideration. Most detectors work off flex and acoustic signatures to generate an alarm, so how those are interpreted are a function of the detector's inteligence. I installed hundreds of the FG series over the years, however I prefer the Visonic Gtechs from an installer and false alarm standpoint, but that's because the Gtechs are self adjusting and continue to do so after the installation.

 

[ecborgoyn]

Thanks for the input.

I just saw another thread talking about a DSC PIR & Glass Break combo unit. Any good or bad experiences? (The thread asked about false indications.....). This device would simplify installation and look a bit better.

How about smoke/heat/motion/glass-break combos??? I know, I know, putting too many eggs in one basket.... But it would look a lot better than multiple devices on a bedroom ceiling. Is there any movement toward multi-function devices??

 

[video321]

How about smoke/heat/motion/glass-break combos??? I know, I know, putting too many eggs in one basket.... But it would look a lot better than multiple devices on a bedroom ceiling. Is there any movement toward multi-function devices??

You won't even find any smoke/co2 combo units. Motion/glassbreak would be about it, but there are 2 issues with those. Placement for the single unit that works well for both techs and the quality of them compared to single units - I may be wrong about quality though as I haven't really looked.

 

[Del91574]

No movement to a single device on an conventional circuit for smoke/co. I want to say Bosch makes a combo, however the CO is specifically supposed to NOT be used for a life safety application. They've had multi-criteria detectors on the addressable side for a few years, however they're used to minimize or eliminate false alarms in areas where smoke detectors previously couldn't be used, such as nightclubs and theaters that use theatrical smoke/fog. They work well, but you won't see them on a basic install.

I was never a fan of the combo GBD/PIR detectors. Usually a huge compromise for device location and unless you pull more conductors to allow it, you're placing 2 powered devices on a single zone, or if you can carry the common negative, use 2 zones, however to me, it was always a huge no-no to place 2 powered devices on the same power feed out to the field, just the way I was taught, because of troubleshooting and introducing more failure points for your detection circuits.

There were a few detectors on the market that used the PIR as an occupancy detector to enable/disable the GBD so you could theoretically have it as a 24 HR loop or similar or minimize falses in occupied spaces on the GBD.

In the case of the most prolific units I've seen, DSC, the adjustment ability of the detection circuit(s) is absyssmal.