Networking and Integrating Legacy Perimeter Security

VIEWPOINT
Networking and
Integrating Legacy
Perimeter Security Systems
Perimeter intrusion detection systems (PIDS) have come a long way since it was
developed some 40 years ago, from the basic point-to-point wiring to the current
trend of IP networking, PIDS have matured considerably.
SUBMfITED BY SENSTAR(MAGAL SECURITY SYSTEMS)
owadays, perimeter security and intrusion
detection products have become more
multifaceted and more powerful than ever.
Along with the development of IP networking, it is now
possible to cover vast areas, even air and water. These
advancements allow perimeter security detection systems
to shift from using individual products to deploying a
combination of different types of detectors and sensors,
which are then controlled through a networked central
control system. In this way; the cost of expensive wiring
and manpower is significantly reduced. Network
integration appears to be a straight forward and effective
complete solution for legacy perimeter security systems;
however, oftentimes different products from different
manufacturers are used, and consequently there are
incompatibility issues.
N
borders
-Routine physical access of each field processor is
required for scheduled tasks such as calibration and
fault monitoring
This solution is still commonly used, especially for
small sites right now.
DRY CONTACTS: TRIED, TESTED, AND
TRUE?
The original and basic solution, dry contacts, employs
a simple and elementary method that uses the electrical
wires (dry contacts) from each processor (node); the
paired wires from each node are woven into a braid that
"travels" directly to a control room. In the control room,
a panel with many pairs of green and red lamps displays
the status of each segment (segments are usually 50 to
200 meters/ISO to 600 feet in length.). This solution is
not practical for large sites, but works for small sites.
However, it has the following disadvantages:
- Excessive and costly communication wiring is required,
especially for long perimeter applications such as
..t. Dry Contacts Wiring
82 IU,;iIiTERNATlOHAI. SEPT 2012
TRANSITION TO NETWORK
In response to the aforementioned disadvantages of the
dry contacts method, almost all PIDS manufacturers have
developed dedicated networks that collect and multiplex
information to and from the various sensors, and as a
result networked PIDS are able to offer the following
valuable features:
-Two-way communication between processors and the
control room
- Remote technical monitoring
-Remote set-up and remote calibration (e.g. threshold
changes)
transmitted to the control center. For this reason, serial
protocols (like RS485) have been adopted by most of the
market leaders.
A. SMS/Alarm Panel
PIDS NETWORK REQUIREMENTS
PIDS generally require the deployment of a large
amount of wiring, sometimes in the ballpark of tens of
kilometers, and they are usually situated in unmanned
areas, which are often difficult to access and are scarce
in power and communication resources. In spite of this,
the network must provide 100 percent reliability since
response time is almost always critical. Fortunately, the
bandwidth requirement is usually low because most of
the filtering is done locally and only the final results are
TCPIIP LIMITATIONS
In recent years, the trend of TCP /lP plus PoE installations has forced PIDS applications to adopt the same
standards, even when there is no actual benefit to the
application. The major drawbacks of installing TCP /lP
plus PoE:
-TCP /lP caters to IT applications rather than real time
applications
-TCP /lP it is not energy efficient since it was designed
for high data transfer rates.
INTEGRATION CHALLENGE
Customers want the freedom and flexibility of being
able to purchase their command and control systems
and PID sensors from different companies. To ensure
continuous communication with in-house manufactured perimeter sensors, nearly all perimeter security
www.asmag.comI 83
VIEWPOINT
compan ies d evelop th e ir own
proprietary display panels; it is a
real challenge to integrate these
p roprietary sen so r s' systems
with the command and control
systems of third party manufacturers.
INTEGRATION METHODS
CONVENTIONAL INTEGRATION
METHODS
There are two main approaches
to integrating PID systems w ith
head-end / control systems:
The traditional method .&. FtJII SW Integration with 3rd Party
Thi s "good old -fas hion ed"
non-network method is based on dry contacts where the
wires from the processors connect directly to the third, party's control system.
Full integration method - In this method, integration
software is u sed to tr an s late informat ion from th e
ne tworked senso rs to the co ntro l di s play. Leading
PID sen sor m anufacturers usually provide integration
modules (SDK or API) that allow programmers to create
tools to allow control systems to "understand" the data.
This metho d offers an easy and complete integ ration
whilst minimizing hardware requirements.
COMBINED METHODS
A mishmash of methods or partial implemen tations:
Network and dry contacts hybrid - In this method,
the ne t work coll ects all th e inform a ti on from the
processo rs and th us all the benefits as men tioned in
... Stewart Dewar, Global Product Manager, Senstar
84
"In:!MBlWDW. SEPT2012
th e Trans itio n to Ne two rk section, s u ch as remote
access, two-way communi cation, e tc. are reali zed.
However, Signals from the networked sensors are not
"translated" via SDK / API tools - w hi ch allo w for
direct communication with control display co mputers
- this is beca use many system integ rato rs wa nt to
save th e time and hassle of wor king toge th er w ith
programmers to create SDK / API tools. To circumvent
the need for program w riting, the netw ork signals are
converted into simple d ry contacts. This is ach ieved
through a software controlled hardware panel, w hich
effecti vely takes network Signals and converts them to
dry con tacts "0" or "1" outputs. These output Signals
are input in to the control syste m th e old fas hioned
way, through paired w ires, via the dry contacts
method .
Eve n t h ough t hi s tec hniqu e see m s aw k ward
and pe rh a p s o utdated, it is s till in demand today,
particularly becau se no time or money is s pent on
programming e fforts, an d impl e m e ntation can be
done in a re lative ly short am ount of time. The mai n
drawback to thi s m ethod is the need for additional
dedicated hardware, w hich acts as a go-between for the
sensors' network and control system.
Partial integration using software - In this method,
the command and con trol system performs some of the
functionality, such as full interface to real-time alarms;
howeve r, none of the tec hnical funct io na lities are
"translated," these functio nalities have to be performed
via an application from the PIDS manufacturer.
1l1l~