Security Event Notification After Communication Failure
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current home security and automation systems require separate programming and control, limiting flexibility and versatility, and are prone to failure as a single point of vulnerability, with no effective mechanism for reporting communication loss or zone fault events to users and central stations.
Innovation Solution
A server-based system that monitors and reports status changes, including loss of communication with a security, monitoring, and automation (SMA) controller, sending notifications to users and central stations in case of communication failure or zone fault events, using multiple network connections and timers to ensure reliable alarm event reporting.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If a single centralized controller is used for security, monitoring and automation, then system flexibility and versatility are improved, but system reliability deteriorates due to single point of failure
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the centralized controller into multiple distributed components: a primary controller and one or more backup controllers. Each controller can independently manage security, monitoring, and automation functions. This segmentation allows the system to maintain versatility while eliminating the single point of failure, as backup controllers can take over if the primary controller fails.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements beforehand cushioning by pre-configuring backup controllers that stand ready to assume control if the primary controller fails. The backup controllers are prepared in advance with the necessary system credentials and control capabilities, so that when communication failure or hardware failure occurs, the system can seamlessly transition without loss of functionality or security coverage.
2Reliability
If separate programming and control stations are used for each security and automation protocol, then system reliability is improved by distributing control, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system merges multiple programming and control functions into a single unified controller that can handle security, monitoring, and automation protocols simultaneously. This consolidation reduces the number of separate devices needed while maintaining system reliability through the backup controller architecture. The unified controller simplifies the overall system architecture and reduces installation complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The controller is designed with universal multi-functionality, capable of executing multiple security and automation protocols through a single device. This eliminates the need for separate dedicated control stations for each protocol type, reducing device complexity while maintaining the reliability benefits of distributed control through the primary-backup architecture.
3Device complexity
If no communication failure reporting mechanism is implemented, then device complexity is reduced, but loss of information occurs regarding zone fault events
Solution Approach 1:
The system implements feedback mechanisms where controllers continuously monitor communication status with central stations and send notifications when communication failures or zone fault events occur. The backup controller specifically monitors for events that occurred during primary controller unavailability and reports these events to ensure no information is lost. This feedback loop maintains system awareness without significantly increasing complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The backup controller performs preliminary action by monitoring and recording events that occur during the primary controller's operational period. When the backup controller becomes active or when communication is restored, it reports these previously occurring events, ensuring that no zone fault information is lost during communication failures or controller transitions.
Data Source
AI summary
Methods and systems for monitoring a premises are described. A server external to the premises may be in communication with a system at the premises. The server may receive status data from the system from one or more interfaces. If a loss of communication occurs on one interface, then the status data may be received via a second interface. The server may determine timing information for status data received via the first interface and for status data received via the second interface. The server may send, based on the timing information, a message to a computing device indicating the loss of communication.