Looks like the image was manually uploaded a few hours later, is that correct? ADC is looking into this and the previous occurrences.
Yes, that’s correct. I manually pushed the upload a few hours after the fact.
Anything to report?
I am actually performing some testing on this today regarding some new info. Should have an update shortly.
I’d like to see if we could run a definitive test on your image sensors. We would need to disable Two Way Voice, have you set off an alarm, walk in front of the image sensors, disarm. Would you be able to test an alarm scenario soon? Let me know and I will temporarily disable two way voice so you can test.
I’ll be home during the day on Monday so we can test then. I’ll follow up with you about it.
Jason, please turn off two-way voice tomorrow (Monday) morning when you see this note. Reply back once it’s done and I’ll test the system.
J.P.
I’ve sent commands to disable. In about 10 minutes (or anytime after) go ahead and test.
OK, I tested it a few minutes ago. Alarm sensor set off the instant alarm and images were uploaded immediately.
It would appear that the two-way voice is interfering?
Yes.
I wanted to get verification in this circumstance, but yes. On Qolsys panels specifically, with 2-way voice turned on, your system will prioritize 2-way voice and alarm signals. Certain ancillary communication appears to be halted for a time. This is intentional, as I understand it. It may be this way to meet certain regulatory measures. I will try to find out more details as to why, or if there is a way around it.
This info was much harder to get to than it should be.
From a technical standpoint I understand it, but it does tend to defeat the primary purpose of the image sensor doesn’t it?
What’s really odd though is that even after the system has been disarmed and either the two-way voice and/or phone call has been completed by the central station, it can still be hours before the images can be manually pushed.
Hopefully there’s a solution or some way to mitigate this. It’s a pretty serious malfunction from my point of view.
From what I gathered, ancillary communication is indeed halted for an hour or more, presumably to ensure no outgoing signals are interrupted in any way for any length of alarm scenario and the immediate follow up. Honestly, I wasn’t given a good reason why that period is so long, which is why I presume it is regulatory and likely misunderstood.
I’ll get back with more info.
Sounds good Jason. I’m awaiting your findings.
Alright, I have some more specific information.
All panels apparently have a mandatory delay in IS uploads during alarm events only - if they are using two way voice. Due to the larger data packet size of Image Sensor communication, it is halted to ensure the cellular connection remains prioritized for alarm sensor signals and two way voice.
This only affects Image Sensor alarm images, no other signals. Again, due to their relative size.
The reason it has not come up before is due to the fact that the delay for other panels is minimal, a couple minutes at most, possibly variable based on Two Way Voice call time.
The Qolsys IQ Panel is subject to a 5000 second delay (yes, that specific) where Image Sensor communication is halted after an alarm occurrence when two way voice is active.
I get the impression that this was an arbitrary value assigned due to some limitation of the hardware, perhaps being unable to process a variable instead, like two way voice disconnection.
I was told to expect this to be shortened in the future.
Well so that leaves me with two undesirable choices doesn’t it. Either use the image sensors the way they’re intended, as camera supplemented motion security sensors or use two-way voice but not at the same time. I’m not really sure which is the lesser of two evils here.
I’m rather surprised you’ve never run into this before but now that you know, you can’t really sell the IS as a security sensor with the Qolsys panel.
but now that you know, you can’t really sell the IS as a security sensor with the Qolsys panel.
Why not?
The primary purpose of the IS is as a passive infrared motion detector that is alarm initiating. In that capacity it meets the standards and requirements as a security sensor I suspect. The surveillance capabilities of the sensor do not diminish its capability as a security sensor.
Or are you saying that the IS fails to adequately initiate an alarm event if motion is detected?
Don’t get me wrong, I like my IS (it works decently if you give it lighting), but if you want surveillance, you should get IR cameras, and not rely solely on the gimmicky capabilities of what is essentially a PIR motion with a cheap low end camera.
It’s marketed as more than a PIR motion though.
The Alarm.com image sensor for Qolsys is a PIR motion detector with a built in camera that automatically takes pictures of alarm events and sends them to your phone for immediate visual verification.
That’s only true if you don’t use two-way voice. So I suppose it works as advertised as long as you’re not going to rely on other means of verification, e.g. sound, of an alarm event before dispatching emergency services.
I don’t want surveillance, I just want to know that if something sets off a motion alarm it can be confirmed as hooded ninjas prior to initiating a full-on police response. The entire purpose of the IS is to confirm that event. If all that’s needed is a PIR or other motion, there are plenty of less expensive and dare I say better options for that.
This isn’t the fault of the IS but rather Qolsys’ conservative programming choices. It works perfectly well with other panels apparently or with Qolsys if you opt out of two-way voice. Which would you choose to do without to protect your home?
Well, it does not stop images from being taken. It does not stop the image sensor from being a security sensor.
It does effectively stop the Image Sensor from being any sort of alarm verification device on IQ panels currently and keeps you from being able to check an image when you likely most want to.
It is a frustrating limitation to be sure. Which provides the greater benefit? I would personally say that the quick retrieval of Image Sensor images outweighs the benefits of two way voice. Two way voice carries a drawback of slightly delayed emergency response in cases of actual intrusion when no one is home. Combine that with the fact I am always within arms reach of my cell phone and I would choose IS.
I suppose I agree regarding which feature to disable until such time as Qolsys realizes the error of their ways. That being said, is the two-way voice still disabled on my account?
Also, does that disable it for other things as well such as fire, panic etc.?
It was re-enabled after testing.
And yes, it would need to be disabled overall.
Keep in mind this did spur some questions on it and ADC is looking into it again to see if the delay can be shortened. So it may not be a necessary decision in the future.