X10 Community Forum

🛡Home Security => Problems and Troubleshooting => Topic started by: MD Corie on November 28, 2011, 06:14:58 AM

Title: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on November 28, 2011, 06:14:58 AM
I'm not sure whether this belongs in Security or Automation, but here goes:

The second biggest problem I have with outdoor motion sensors (the biggest being improper triggering) is trying to align the sensor's effective field of view with the area that I actually want it to cover, both in terms of depth and width.  So far, the only way I know of is to use the trial and error method, making various adjustments to the orientation of the motion sensor and/or to any added masks or shields.  This process is full of uncertainty of results, and is quite tedious - and sometimes never-ending.

So, my question is:  Is there any more effective, more definite/reliable, and less time-consuming, method for getting a motion sensor "aligned" to the desired detection area - so that it reacts properly to any motion in the desired area, while ignoring all motion outside of that area?

Also, what is the best/most reliable way to induce triggering in order to test the alignment?  (I've simply been wandering around in the desired area, and this does not seem to produce consistent results in any way, shape, or form, so I'm wondering whether there is something -maybe a light or reflector?- that I should use in order to get definite triggering results).

I sure would appreciate any/all helpful hints, because I'm thoroughly frustrated by my attempts to date. B:(

Thanks in advance!
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Brian H on November 28, 2011, 06:22:36 AM
The X10 motion sensors use a Passive Infrared Detector to detect motion. By a change in detected heat in predetermined time frame.
From the X10 wiki on automation sensors.
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/What_is_Passive_Infrared_Detection
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/Optimizing_Motion_Sensor_Detection

If you are using security sensors there is a section in the wiki for those also. They also use a PIR detector.
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/Security_Motion_Sensor
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on November 28, 2011, 06:56:16 AM
The X10 motion sensors use a Passive Infrared Detector to detect motion. By a change in detected heat in predetermined time frame.
From the X10 wiki on automation sensors.
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/What_is_Passive_Infrared_Detection
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/Optimizing_Motion_Sensor_Detection

If you are using security sensors there is a section in the wiki for those also. They also use a PIR detector.
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/Security_Motion_Sensor

Thanks, but those deal with performance issues (which I also have here - but that's another whole rat's nest).  In this post, I'm only asking about effective ways to determine/adjust/limit the area that a motion sensor will react to.  The two ways that I am aware of to affect the "viewed" area are to alter the orientation of the motion sensor module, and to strategically "mask" portions of the sensor in order to shield it from motion that might occur in surrounding area(s) that are not of interest.  The problem here is the extremely tedious and unreliable nature of attempting to do these adjustments via trial and error, using myself as the "target" to be detected.  So, I'm hoping there is some more systematic procedure, as well as some more reliable way to trigger the sensor during testing in order to accurately define the boundaries of the viewed area.  Any suggestions?
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: everydayflyer on December 18, 2011, 12:08:48 PM
Issue is that the sensitivity and range(field) will change as the temperature and conditions change. The greater the difference between ambient temp. and body temp. the greater the range and sensitivity. Also concrete (driveways),buildings,grass and other vegetation will heat at different rates depending on exposure to sun and wind.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 18, 2011, 01:18:36 PM
Issue is that the sensitivity and range(field) will change as the temperature and conditions change. The greater the difference between ambient temp. and body temp. the greater the range and sensitivity. Also concrete (driveways),buildings,grass and other vegetation will heat at different rates depending on exposure to sun and wind.

That's quite true, and I presume that "alignment" would have to be done at some "nominal" time... but here, I'm not worried so much about performance as I am about simply trying to match the sensors to their desired coverage area - in other words, to "adjust" each sensor's field of view so that it can react only to movement within its desired area(s).  This need is partly to eliminate triggers from motion that occurs in nearby areas that are not of interest, and partly to avoid "overlap" of adjacent sensors (in other words, so that only one sensor will react to movement in any given area).

Now, I suppose macros might be used cleverly to enhance the detemination of what part of a common area that motion is occurring in via some sort of "triangulation" - but I think that might require even more precise determination of each sensor's actual field of view (?)

Anyway, the need here is to figure out how to restrict the detections to only motion in specific areas, mainly because the motion sensors' field of "view" is wider than the field of view of the associated camera.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 18, 2011, 04:33:05 PM
Now, I suppose macros might be used cleverly to enhance the detemination of what part of a common area that motion is occurring in via some sort of "triangulation" - but I think that might require even more precise determination of each sensor's actual field of view (?)

Anyway, the need here is to figure out how to restrict the detections to only motion in specific areas, mainly because the motion sensors' field of "view" is wider than the field of view of the associated camera.
There is no magic formula. It is trial and error. Mounting high and pointing downward helps control the field of vision. However, as everydayflyer pointed out; what is true today will change tomorrow. What is true during the day will change at night. It is a five buck PIR detector with range parameters that will change daily.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 18, 2011, 07:20:41 PM
It is a five buck PIR detector with range parameters that will change daily.

They're stable for that long?  rofl
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 19, 2011, 08:18:47 AM
It is a five buck PIR detector with range parameters that will change daily.

They're stable for that long?  rofl
Yes, I know, sometimes I tend to be overly optomistic.  :'
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 19, 2011, 11:28:22 AM
Now, I suppose macros might be used cleverly to enhance the detemination of what part of a common area that motion is occurring in via some sort of "triangulation" - but I think that might require even more precise determination of each sensor's actual field of view (?)

Anyway, the need here is to figure out how to restrict the detections to only motion in specific areas, mainly because the motion sensors' field of "view" is wider than the field of view of the associated camera.
There is no magic formula. It is trial and error. Mounting high and pointing downward helps control the field of vision. However, as everydayflyer pointed out; what is true today will change tomorrow. What is true during the day will change at night. It is a five buck PIR detector with range parameters that will change daily.

I'm sadly well aware of the "instability" of the performance parameters of these sensors, but just to be sure I'm on the same page here, does this instability also affect the area that the sensor will respond to?  (I mean, other than adverse effects on the range component of the covered area, will it significantly alter the width aspect of the field where a sensor will detect motion, too?)

What I'm trying to do here is to "calibrate" the motion sensors so they will "see" (generally) only the same area as their associated cameras can view.  The problem is that the sensors now pick up motion in the adjoining sensors' "areas", too - and so it's hard to discern which camera to turn on.

I'm assuming the only way to establish these zones is to use trial and error to some extent, but I'm hoping there is some way to definitely trigger a sensor from a given spot in its field of view.  So far, it seems the "warm body" approach (i.e. - me) does not give very reliable triggering, so it's hard to establish the current boundaries of a sensor that way.  So, I was hoping there might be some "tool" or technique that would give more reliable triggering.  (I've tried off-the-wall stuff like shining a flashlight at the sensor, and even using a driveway reflector to "flash" the sensor, but nothing really seems to work consistently).
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 19, 2011, 02:33:17 PM
 B:(
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 19, 2011, 11:52:26 PM
B:(

Gee, thanks for the "help".  :-\  I take it you're claiming the motion sensors are junk, and not only does their performance change over time with changing environmental conditions, but their behavior also changes at random from minute to minute?  If so, then there's no hope of using them to control cameras to monitor any real time events?  In that case, I guess my question has to become one of what sort of sensor can be used to detect intruders reliably in the viewed area and trigger cameras to observe them in a timely manner?
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 20, 2011, 07:46:27 AM
Trying to align something you can't see with something else that you can't see is going to be very difficult at best (mindless optimism, it's actually just on the wrong side of impossible).

The X10 motion sensors are about twice as vague as you've found them to be - often I cannot get a reliable read with a ***eye sensor across a standard doorway under fairly stable light and heat conditions. Once you start mounting them outside, subject to light and temperature changes you might as well just give up, stand outside and watch what's going on for yourself instead of trying to do it electronically.

I gave up on camera systems using motions sensors a long time ago.
If you only want to detect motion within the view of the camera, then you might like to look at a 'real' surveillance system that uses pixel changes from the camera to start events.

My opinions are based on experience and do not necessarily reflect those of others on this forum who will likely disagree with everything I say (depending upon prevailing ambient light/temperature conditions)  :'

I know there are many here who use the motion sensors reliably, but you'll probably find that their requirements tend to be a little more vague than the exact critical sensing conditions that you're trying to achieve .
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 20, 2011, 12:01:51 PM
Trying to align something you can't see with something else that you can't see is going to be very difficult at best...
...
I know there are many here who use the motion sensors reliably, but you'll probably find that their requirements tend to be a little more vague than the exact critical sensing conditions that you're trying to achieve .

My own experience confirms that this scenario is far from ideal... unfortunately, it is what I have, and my only real options are to either give up entirely, or try to wring whatever functionality I can out of what I have.

Just to clarify the picture a bit, I'm not using ****Eye motion sensors, but rather the Floodlight motion sensors (model PR511, IIRC).  I don't know how the types compare, nor whether these sensors have the same characteristics as the ****Eye types, but I do know they differ operationally in a couple of ways.

By the way, I have also used three different EagleEye sensors indoors (although they are supposedly made for outdoor use).  They generally work fairly well for controlling area lights (at least until their batteries start getting low, then all bets are off), but they are still noticably less "positive" in their responses when compared to non-X10 motion-sensing bulb sockets that I have.

Anyway, back to the issue of triggering surveillance cameras with the floodlight sensors that I have, I'm guessing a "tool" that would be helpful when trying to determine the areas "covered" by the motion sensors would be something that I could use that would positively trigger the sensor from a given spot, regardless of any nuances of performance variations in the sensor.  (In other words, something that would overcome any borderline sensitivity issues due to environment or whatever, and no fooling ensure a yes/no detection from a given spot in the area of interest).

What I'm hoping to accomplish is to positively map the edges of the sensor's horizontal (side-to-side) field of view - which I am assuming to be more of a "mechanical" limit and thus unaffected by performance variations due to current environmental factors.  (If this assumption is invalid, then the whole exercise is moot).

The end result that I seek is to be able to tell which camera to turn on when any given sensor triggers - as opposed to the vaguery that occurs when a sensor can detect areas covered by more than one camera, and thus it becomes impossible to determine which camera to turn on.  Again, my assumption is that it should be viable to mask or orient the sensors so that they also can "see" only an approximation of the 60-degree field of view that the cameras see - and will ignore motion that occurs outside of such regions.

To me, this is a different problem than what has been discussed here - that is, my interest is in limiting detections to only certain areas, rather than addressing the concern about whether or not detections will actually occur within such areas, depending on environmental factors, phase of the moon, or whatever...  In other words, I'm not trying to deal with ensuring that "real" detections occur within the view of the sensors, but rather to limiting the area that they can react to.  Unfortunately, this still presents the need to ensure detections in order to map the boundaries... hence my original question of whether there are any good tools or techniques that would facilitate this boundary mapping, given the variability of the sensors' performance.  My thought was that some readily-detectable IR source could be moved from the sides of the detection area towards the middle until the sensor triggered, thus determining the edge of view.  Unfortunately, I have not come up with any IR source that seems to produce any consistent results... so either my trigger source is not adequate, or else my procedure is bogus somehow...  so I'm hoping someone may have some better ideas.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 20, 2011, 01:38:59 PM
B:(

Gee, thanks for the "help".  :-\  I take it you're claiming the motion sensors are junk, and not only does their performance change over time with changing environmental conditions, but their behavior also changes at random from minute to minute?  If so, then there's no hope of using them to control cameras to monitor any real time events?  In that case, I guess my question has to become one of what sort of sensor can be used to detect intruders reliably in the viewed area and trigger cameras to observe them in a timely manner?
No. The detectors are not junk, neither the xxxEyes, nor the floodlight PIRs. But what you want to do with PIR motion detectors isn't possible, and that has been pointed out several times in this thread.  Did you bother to read the Wiki sites you were provided earlier in this thread?  One of the sites gives typical field of view for X10 PIRs and can be overlays for your cameras...BUT...

The PIRs depend upon seeing a MOVING heat differential. THIS INCLUDES EDGE OF FIELD DETECTION. A warm body moving into the field of view will be detected sooner on a cool day than on a warm day.  The edge of field detection is dynamic, and heavily influenced by ambient temperature, the size of target, amount of sunlight (background IR), etc. What you want to do:  find precises and dependable, repeatable edge of field detection points using PIR motion detectors, just isn't possible.

What you want is a video switcher/multiplexer which will output a trigger when movement is detected in the video frame.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 21, 2011, 12:28:57 AM
B:(

Gee, thanks for the "help".  :-\  I take it you're claiming the motion sensors are junk, and not only does their performance change over time with changing environmental conditions, but their behavior also changes at random from minute to minute?  If so, then there's no hope of using them to control cameras to monitor any real time events?  In that case, I guess my question has to become one of what sort of sensor can be used to detect intruders reliably in the viewed area and trigger cameras to observe them in a timely manner?
No. The detectors are not junk, neither the xxxEyes, nor the floodlight PIRs. But what you want to do with PIR motion detectors isn't possible, and that has been pointed out several times in this thread.  Did you bother to read the Wiki sites you were provided earlier in this thread?  One of the sites gives typical field of view for X10 PIRs and can be overlays for your cameras...BUT...

The PIRs depend upon seeing a MOVING heat differential. THIS INCLUDES EDGE OF FIELD DETECTION. A warm body moving into the field of view will be detected sooner on a cool day than on a warm day.  The edge of field detection is dynamic, and heavily influenced by ambient temperature, the size of target, amount of sunlight (background IR), etc. What you want to do:  find precises and dependable, repeatable edge of field detection points using PIR motion detectors, just isn't possible.

What you want is a video switcher/multiplexer which will output a trigger when movement is detected in the video frame.

If I could afford one, I'd be interested in trying out a video detector.  But for my application, it does not appear that it would be practical.

Anyway, for some reason, I cannot seem to get across what I really want to do with these sensors (as opposed to what people seem to insist that I want to do).  Yes, I bothered to read the wikis... but I wonder if anyone bothered to read what I am actually trying to accomplish;  it sure doesn't seem that way. :-\  For example, I don't necessarily care what the normal field of view of a sensor is, if I'm trying to mask it in order to be consistent with the field of view of its associated camera;  instead, I need to find out where the sensor is "seeing" when I apply the masking adjustments.  My assumption is that the sensor physically cannot see beyond the masks, regardless of what the evironmental conditions may be doing to the sensor.  I also assume that a strong enough mapping IR source ought to overcome any sensitivity issues with the detector and trigger the sensor when it moves from behind the mask into the non-masked area.  If these assumptions are incorrect, then I surely don't understand why.

I don't pretend to have any great expertise with these sensors - not IR sensors in general, for that matter - but things are just not making sense.  For instance, what consequence is there in regards to mapping the boundary even if the performance/sensitivity of the sensor might vary over time as the ambient conditions change?  I don't see why long-term variances would be an issue for short-term mapping.

It also sounds to me like "precision" that I am "requiring" is being over-estimated:  I really only need to segregate the detection areas into about 6-8 "quadrants" around the building, and be able to tell which quadrant motion has been detected in - without getting triggers on two or more sensors for any given motion.  For example, if motion is occuring to the northwest of the building, I need it to trigger only the northwest sensor, and not the north, northwest and west sensors.  So, even if the actual boundaries are "sloppy" by a few degrees left or right, it should be possible to separate the fields of view adequately to get distinct detections, even if it may mean that "dead" areas might develop between the sensors' fields of view under various environmental conditions.  It's not my expectation that one sensor's field will end at 45 degrees and the next will pick up at 46 degrees, although there are a couple of places where areas would need to get relatively "tight".  Rather, my expectation would be to restrict the sensors to "view" an area limited to about 50-60 degrees, and roughly in alignment with the 60 degree field of the associated camera - instead of allowing the sensor to trigger on motion that occurs both within and outside of the 60 degree field of the camera, and especially not within the field of a different camera.  I'm just finding it difficult to understand why this would be such a challenge.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 21, 2011, 10:26:16 AM
OK Let me put this another way. There ain't no "tools",  there ain't no magic formulas. It is all trial and error and that includes masking the detectors. You could use a portable IR source (there are battery video camera lights which are IR, not full spectrum light) to define the borders of the field, but the borders will be true only for the concentrated IR source,  a warm body would produce completely different borders).  And even with masks on the PR511s detector windows, the edge of field detection, and the sensitivity of the detector will not be consistant.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 21, 2011, 07:14:59 PM

It also sounds to me like "precision" that I am "requiring" is being over-estimated:  I really only need to segregate the detection areas into about 6-8 "quadrants" around the building, and be able to tell which quadrant motion has been detected in - without getting triggers on two or more sensors for any given motion.  For example, if motion is occuring to the northwest of the building, I need it to trigger only the northwest sensor, and not the north, northwest and west sensors. 

I'm sure that given enough time and motivation it's entirely possible to do almost what you need.

Imagine the purely hypothetical set-up...

All motion sensors are active until motion is detected in one zone. As soon as motion is detected in a single zone all other motion sensors become deactivated. When motion is no longer sensed in the first zone all sensors become active again. Scenario repeats.

This could possibly be achieved with clever use of macros and flags. Sensor one sets a flag so that motion on other sensors is ignored until sensor one no longer sees motion.

Obviously there must be 'blind' space between the sensors for this to occur - the blind space must be fairly significant to allow for heat, light and temperature variations that will naturally occur.


You can see the variance between two seemingly identical motion sensors by mounting them immediately next to each other and running a set of tests to see which one activates and when - the angle and range will differ even on high end motion sensors.


{Rhetorical Question}
What do you want to happen if your motion source tracks around your property (looking in different windows, trying doors, climbing downpipes)?
{/Rhetorical Question}

Intruder approaches from NorthWest (NW motion detected), intruder moves left (N motion ignored), intruder moves further and smashes window on NorthEast side of house as camera system happily records no motion to NorthWest.

Intruder approaches from NorthWest as intruder 2 approaches from North - since you only want motion detection in a single zone that must mean that only one intruder is detected.



If you need to detect movement within the view of the camera and nowhere else, you MUST use the camera to detect the movement.
If you need to vaguely detect motion somewhere near the camera, then you have all the stuff and you just need to set it out as best you can.

There's no polite way of saying it, but although you may think that a video detector is not practical for your application, I think the truth is that your application is not practical unless there's something vital that I'm missing - it makes absolutley no sense to focus motion on a single zone and ignore any and all motion in other zones.

I'll stand aside now and wait to see what happens :)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 21, 2011, 08:44:07 PM
OK Let me put this another way. There ain't no "tools",  there ain't no magic formulas. It is all trial and error and that includes masking the detectors. You could use a portable IR source (there are battery video camera lights which are IR, not full spectrum light) to define the borders of the field, but the borders will be true only for the concentrated IR source,  a warm body would produce completely different borders).  And even with masks on the PR511s detector windows, the edge of field detection, and the sensitivity of the detector will not be consistant.

If all you say is realistic and typical for motion detection, then the situation is distressing, to say the least.

The variance you claim for borders still puzzles me;  I just can't get my head around how a sensor's performance variances can cause it to "see" beyond the "hard stops" (masks) such that it would produce the varying boundaries that you describe.  ???
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 21, 2011, 09:00:48 PM
The variance you claim for borders still puzzles me;  I just can't get my head around how a sensor's performance variances can cause it to "see" beyond the "hard stops" (masks) such that it would produce the varying boundaries that you describe.  ???
The sensors detection sensitivity (performance) remains the same. What the sensor  is detecting (IR emission) is the variation. 

A video camera "sees" farther on a clear day than a foggy day. Apply that axiom to the motion sensor with ambient temperature and body size being the fog. Masking will restrick the width of the field just like zooming a camera lens but the fog is still there.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 21, 2011, 09:30:24 PM

It also sounds to me like "precision" that I am "requiring" is being over-estimated:  I really only need to segregate the detection areas into about 6-8 "quadrants" around the building, and be able to tell which quadrant motion has been detected in - without getting triggers on two or more sensors for any given motion.  For example, if motion is occuring to the northwest of the building, I need it to trigger only the northwest sensor, and not the north, northwest and west sensors. 

I'm sure that given enough time and motivation it's entirely possible to do almost what you need.

Imagine the purely hypothetical set-up...

All motion sensors are active until motion is detected in one zone. As soon as motion is detected in a single zone all other motion sensors become deactivated. When motion is no longer sensed in the first zone all sensors become active again. Scenario repeats.

This could possibly be achieved with clever use of macros and flags. Sensor one sets a flag so that motion on other sensors is ignored until sensor one no longer sees motion.

Obviously there must be 'blind' space between the sensors for this to occur - the blind space must be fairly significant to allow for heat, light and temperature variations that will naturally occur.


You can see the variance between two seemingly identical motion sensors by mounting them immediately next to each other and running a set of tests to see which one activates and when - the angle and range will differ even on high end motion sensors.


{Rhetorical Question}
What do you want to happen if your motion source tracks around your property (looking in different windows, trying doors, climbing downpipes)?
{/Rhetorical Question}

Intruder approaches from NorthWest (NW motion detected), intruder moves left (N motion ignored), intruder moves further and smashes window on NorthEast side of house as camera system happily records no motion to NorthWest.

Intruder approaches from NorthWest as intruder 2 approaches from North - since you only want motion detection in a single zone that must mean that only one intruder is detected.



If you need to detect movement within the view of the camera and nowhere else, you MUST use the camera to detect the movement.
If you need to vaguely detect motion somewhere near the camera, then you have all the stuff and you just need to set it out as best you can.

There's no polite way of saying it, but although you may think that a video detector is not practical for your application, I think the truth is that your application is not practical unless there's something vital that I'm missing - it makes absolutley no sense to focus motion on a single zone and ignore any and all motion in other zones.

I'll stand aside now and wait to see what happens :)

I think your "lock-out" proposal would be simple to implement, and would be a reasonable work-around if the sensors cannot be prevented from "overlapping" their detection areas.  I was hoping to be able to prevent the overlaps, though.

Your rhetorical scenario is - unfortunately - exactly what occurs under current conditions here - at least in the general context.  (As far as I know, there have been no instances of trying doors and climbing down pipes... ;) but motion frequently moves from sensor field to sensor field in rapid succession... and the macro-based system can't keep up with the movement from zone to zone.  (This was not the case when only the hardware was being used to control the cameras directly, and the slow response is a direct result of the slowness that the macros run, and problems with a new macro trying to run when a previous one is still running - but all that is the topic of a different thread).

Regarding the multiple-intruder scenario, that is indeed a problem, but the inherent limitations of the camera system mean that only one camera can be operating at any particular instant, anyway.  However, the scheme in use says that the most recently-detected motion will activate the corresponding camera in all cases.  If motion were detected in more than one zone exactly at the same time, then PLC collisions would likely result in both motions being missed, as the trigger signals would tromp on each other.  If the triggers occur far enough apart that they don't get stomped, then the first motion would trigger the first camera, and the second motion would then switch the view to the second camera, and so forth.  If the triggers came far enough apart in time that the cameras could come on, then it might be that a glimpse of the earlier motion would occur before the cameras would switch, but in any case, only the last-triggered view would remain in effect.  Obviously, only one area could be observed at length, or else some sort of scan scheme might be implemented, to periodically switch among the active views.  None of this is ideal for observing the entire situation, but then again, the multiple intruders is a relatively unlikely scenario... and since we are already pushing the envelope of capabilities in detecting just one intruder, there's no point in trying to stretch the system beyond that. :'

As far as the comment about ignoring motion in all but one "zone", I'm not sure where that comes from, because that is not at all my intent.  I merely want to get the right camera to turn on when motion occurs within its field of view, without any desire to suppress other legitimate detections.  The problem I have now is that many of the detectors will trigger on motion that occurs within multiple fields of view instead of only within the field of the associated camera, and thus often results in the wrong camera being turned on.  I'm seeking to prevent that overlap, not to suppress the other sensors.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 21, 2011, 09:34:27 PM
The variance you claim for borders still puzzles me;  I just can't get my head around how a sensor's performance variances can cause it to "see" beyond the "hard stops" (masks) such that it would produce the varying boundaries that you describe.  ???
The sensors detection sensitivity (performance) remains the same. What the sensor  is detecting (IR emission) is the variation. 

A video camera "sees" farther on a clear day than a foggy day. Apply that axiom to the motion sensor with ambient temperature and body size being the fog. Masking will restrick the width of the field just like zooming a camera lens but the fog is still there.


OK, but my point is that the variations should affect only the depth of view, not the width - which is what I'm concerned with as far as preventing overlap of the sensors.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: systemdm on December 21, 2011, 10:55:33 PM
MD Corie,

This is not an X10 solution, but have you tried BlueIris.   You can set up your cameras and mask off what areas you don't want to detect motion.  Great piece of software.   I belive they even have a deal with Foscam IP cameras to get a discount on the software.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 21, 2011, 11:09:17 PM

OK, but my point is that the variations should affect only the depth of view, not the width - which is what I'm concerned with as far as preventing overlap of the sensors.

Just because you WANT something to work in a certain way, that does not make it so.  >*<

Another analogy for you.
If you wear glasses please remove them and try to detect the exact edges of a person just outside your comfortable range of vision. If you don't wear glasses, please borrow some, put them on and try the same experiment.
Now, close one eye, stand on one leg and ask the blurry person to raise their left arm.
Next turn sideways so that you can see you blurry friend's arm out of the corner of your blurry eye.
Ask them to raise and lower their arm at random.
What you are seeing is approximately what your motion sensor 'sees' at the edge of its detection zone - a general blur that is almost certainly somewhere close to being seen, but sometimes not.
Now try to describe that exact vague location to someone standing just to your right and ask them to take pictures of what they can see.

You cannot change that with masks, you cannot change that with expensive motion sensors. This is the nature of motion sensors. With clever macros and flags you CAN do what you're asking even with overlapping sensors, but only if your subject is co-operative and moves slowly enough for your macros to keep up.


Try some alternative method of keeping intruders away instead of simply noting that they were maybe there by chasin them with a camera system that is inadequate for your needs.

A sign in your yard that states...

Dear Intruder,
I'd really like to know that you were in my yard, but I don't have a surveillance system that quite works the way I'd like it to. If you wouldn't mind slipping a slightly out-of-focus picture of yourself under my front door I'd be really grateful.
Oh, by the way, I have nothing worth stealing. Feel free to look around, but please don't break in. I promise you, there's nothing worth taking; well, unless you think my cat is valuable.
Thanks. >!
[/b]


Yup, I think that should work.  #:)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on December 22, 2011, 07:15:54 AM
From the macros that you posted in the other thread, it looks like you are trying to make a fancy motion-tracking video system out of X10 parts.
I don't think you'll be able to do it, as the components are just not good enough to do what you want. I think you'll need a motion-tracking system that is computer-based, and uses the changing images themselves to detect the motion, not relying on inaccurate sensors to do it.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 22, 2011, 11:00:10 PM

OK, but my point is that the variations should affect only the depth of view, not the width - which is what I'm concerned with as far as preventing overlap of the sensors.

Just because you WANT something to work in a certain way, that does not make it so.  >*<

... be really grateful.
Oh, by the way, I have nothing worth stealing. Feel free to look around, but please don't break in. I promise you, there's nothing worth taking; well, unless you think my cat is valuable.
Thanks. >![/center][/b]


Yup, I think that should work.  #:)

Clearly, wanting something to work as it should does not make it so when dealing with these devices...  ::)  However, there are certain laws of physics that seem to be violated in these instances, so I'm trying to find the explanation(s) of what otherwise appears to be "heresy".

This whole diversion is why I really hated to expand this from a limited technical question to a full-fledged examination of of my system and devolving into a critique of it, that seems largely based on some twisted assumptions of my needs, my requirements, with stuff from somewhere out in left field thrown in for good measure.

The crux of the issue with an overall system "evaluation" is that as fouled up as it may be for whatever reason, it's all I have to work with - and all I'll likely be able to have - so my objective is to make it work as well as it can... and one problem to be solved is how to segregate the viewing zones of motion sensors.

Even before ever posting this question, I was painfully aware of the limitations of capabilities that these sensors exhibit... so there's no reason to dwell on those.  But, what I fail to understand is why it is supposedly not possible to restrict the field of view of these sensors (by some means), so that they do not react to anything outside of that field - without shutting them down entirely (as seems to be the only alternative brought forth).

The other thing that bothers me is that it would appear that the behavior of these sensors is so random that it cannot be characterized in any way... because if it was possible to characterize their behavior, then it should be possible to make use of that to create a work-around.  Whether that would be a practical, usable solution is another question... I just find it hard to believe that their behavior is so random that there is no way to get a handle on it.

And the kicker is that these devices were marketed to me as being not only capable of doing this job, but actually intended to do it.  Apparently, that was a patently bogus claim.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Dave on December 23, 2011, 11:19:32 AM
..... And the kicker is that these devices were marketed to me as being not only capable of doing this job, but actually intended to do it.  Apparently, that was a patently bogus claim.

This is the "holiday season" around my house. And every year my sister-inlaw, my nephews wife, and I... take copious pictures at family gatherings. And each year... certain people.... aren't in the pictures. Some people just don't like having their pictures taken (for whatever reason) and they simply avoid the situation. It isn't difficult to merely look away... or just look down.

When outside.... wearing a hat pulled down, or a hoodie, big sunglasses, a hand to the face, keeping the sun on the back of ones head prevents decent video or photos. Everyone knows that. Let me repeat this.... EVERY human being on the planet knows how to avoid having their image being captured by a camera.

Obsessing about a part of a security setup is completely normal. We all do it! I remember reading of a forum member who mounted his security alarm console on his ceiling. His solution to what he reasoned was an access flaw. It normal for people to see the flaws in the systems they create. When we engineer our own systems.... we run the risk of over-engineering them as well.

All systems have weaknesses. We have to accept a certain amount of vulnerability within our setups.

Camera security is the weakest link of any security system. That cannot be changed. Cameras add a level of deterrent. That's it, that's all they do. Sure with the millions of security cameras running 24/7... people are caught... doing all sorts of things. Many people have been prosecuted  with X10 camera images. But I wouldn't make that my goal.

Would be intruders pick their targets based on easiness, risk, and reward. Making your home harder to get into... and with greater risk of being caught... should be the goal. If you've created a "reward rich target" that is another matter entirely (for which you should seek professional advice).

A sign that warns of cameras.... isn't a bad idea. I use a voice announcement as seen in my YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/suitmanIM).
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 23, 2011, 03:47:27 PM

OK, but my point is that the variations should affect only the depth of view, not the width - which is what I'm concerned with as far as preventing overlap of the sensors.
Bogus.
You continue to make the same wrong assumptions when it has been clearly explained by multiple people. Why would the width of field NOT be effected????
My fun meter is pegged - I'm outta here.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 23, 2011, 05:13:04 PM
The laws of physics are not being violated in any way at all. There are no magical elves, pixies or dwarves living in your sensors that are able to bend, twist or otherwise muck about with gravity, radiance or light (but there may be gremlins - please note that gremlins do not really exist, they are simply an excuse used by people unable to come up with solutions).

You simply do not understand...
1) What a camera system is supposed to do,
2) How motion sensors actually operate,
3) How to integrate one with the other,
4) How to listen when you are told the same thing multiple times,
5) All of the above, or
6) Gremlins

If I knew how to put a poll on this I'm sure you would get an overwhelming vote for 5)

Now, if you don't mind, I'm taking my ball and going home.  >!
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 24, 2011, 02:37:55 AM

OK, but my point is that the variations should affect only the depth of view, not the width - which is what I'm concerned with as far as preventing overlap of the sensors.
Bogus.
You continue to make the same wrong assumptions when it has been clearly explained by multiple people. Why would the width of field NOT be effected????
My fun meter is pegged - I'm outta here.

I'm the one making wrong assumptions???  Wow!  That's rich... considering how many wrong assumptions people have been attributing to my system, on basis that I have no clue about.  For example, "security" against criminals is, at best, a side benefit of my system - not its raison d'etre - so whether or not it can accomplish that shouldn't be the main issue here... yet people have somehow decided by some sort of concensus that it is indeed why my system is in place.  Talk about wrong assumptions! ::)

Be that as it may, let my try (once again) to explain the laws of physics that I'm referring to.  Because people seem to like analogies, here's mine, using a camera as an analogy for a motion sensor:

Let's say a camera is installed, having a 60-degree wide field of view.  Under optimum environmental conditions, this camera "sees" whatever exists within that 60-degree field of view, within the constraints of the camera's capabilities.  (For instance, a low-res camera might not be able to distinguish objects smaller than, say, 1' tall at distances beyond, say, 30' from the camera... but can distinguish objects larger than, say, 5' tall at distances closer than, say, 80' from the camera).  Now, the camera's characteristics or optical factors may prevent it from "seeing" some or all such objects when certain adverse environmental conditions exist - such as rain, snow, fog, darkness, etc. (that might impair the camera's ability to view part or all of it's optimum field of view), or even temperature extremes (that might impair the operation of the camera itself, preventing it from "distinquishing" all objects within of its usual field of view).

The camera's physical width of field (and therefore the effective boundaries of that field, as imposed on the surrounding terrain) is determined by the physics of the detector and optics of the camera, and therefore will not change (barring any physical deformation of the camera's optics due to extreme temperatures or whatever).  Variations of other environmental conditions might affect how far away (depth of field) the camera can see objects at any given time, but will not affect how wide the field of view is, because that remains limited by the physical constraints of the optics.  Further, the maximum width of view could be narrowed by placing optically-opaque objects near the camera on the sides of its view.  Again, environmental conditions may affect how far the camera can see effectively while these objects restrict the width of view, but the environmental conditions will not alter the width of view.

If we can agree that a camera is a fair analogy of a motion sensor (as was supposed by others earlier in this thread), then let me use this analogy in an attempt to make my point:

Let's say there are two cameras mounted such that their width of views partially overlap at some distance from the cameras, making it possible for both cameras to see the same objects while those objects are in the areas of the terrain where the views of the two cameras overlap.  If it is desired to prevent both cameras from viewing the same objects simultaneously, then the camera(s) would need to be adjusted away from each other, or else some blocking object(s) would have to be imposed on the adjacent side(s) of one or both cameras' field of view, so that no overlap of views would exist.  Once configured this way, no amount of normal environmental variations would alter the physical limits of the views, to somehow re-impose an overlap condition.  Same thing applies to motion sensors:  Affects of environmental variations are not going to magically overcome the physical characteristics and expand the width of view so that the sensors' fields of view would again overlap, as some people are claiming.

In order to set up the two cameras so that they view adjacent areas of the terrain without any overlap would require trial and error, by adjusting the cameras and/or any blocking objects and looking at the on-screen image to find out where its boundaries fall in relation to the viewed terrain.  Presumably, one would make these observations under reasonably optimal environmental conditions, yet it would be possible to make them under adverse conditions, even in total darkness, by taking some measure to "enhance" the spot being "mapped" - for instance, by placing a small bright light at the spot of interest, or by moving such a light into the field of view from the side until it shows up on the screen.  The spot in the terrain where this occurs can then be "mapped" as the edge of the viewed area.  Similarly, with motion sensors, it should be possible to "map" the physical sides of the field of view by using some IR "spot source" that is intense enough to overcome any "weak" detection due to adverse environmental conditions, and moving it towards the field of view from the side until it comes into the physical view of the sensor... but the concensus here has been that this is not possible under any circumstances.  I find this hard to believe because it would mean that the motion sensors must "detect" only at random - in which case, they would not be sensors, but just noise sources.

My question all along has been what can be used to provide an intense "spot source" of IR that will definitely trigger a sensor when it moves within the sensor's field, or if there is a better technique that would ensure detections (like maybe how fast or how far to move the "target")... because everything I've tried so far does not seem to have enough "umph" to ensure that the sensor will "see" it move.  I fail to understand why any actual or assumed application of my sensors has any bearing on this... at least not beyond establishing the ambient conditions that it would be used in - yet that seems to be the direction this discussion has been pushed into. ???
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 24, 2011, 10:07:05 AM
OK. I got it now.

I'll agree with you. Physics is broken.  -:)

Call your local reality inspector and have him run a standard testing sequence to work out exactly why radiant heat patterns do not work the same way as visual light patterns in your locale. I'm sure that when you speak to him he'll bring several friends with white jackets. It's likely his friends will bring you a special coat with the fastenings down the back and extra long sleeves with strings on the ends  :'

Last time I needed to get reality adjusted, it got pretty expensive - you may find it a lot less expensive to just move.



Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 24, 2011, 02:25:54 PM

I'm the one making wrong assumptions??? 
Yep. You are.
And the fact that you have not been able to to do what you want to do, should confirm that fact to you.

Ambient temperature and other environmental factors will effect the "visibility" of the heat source target to the sensor. It will effect depth of field, and it will effect width of field. If a heat source is nearly invisible to the sensor, the heat source will be able to move farther into the field FROM ANY DIRECTION before the sensor will trigger. Continue to deny that all you want, it's becoming humorus.

I suggested the IR movie light source, but like I said, the perimeter you are able to define will only be true for the IR movie light.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 26, 2011, 12:23:41 PM
OK. I got it now.

I'll agree with you. Physics is broken.  -:)

Call your local reality inspector and have him run a standard testing sequence to work out exactly why radiant heat patterns do not work the same way as visual light patterns in your locale. I'm sure that when you speak to him he'll bring several friends with white jackets. It's likely his friends will bring you a special coat with the fastenings down the back and extra long sleeves with strings on the ends  :'

Last time I needed to get reality adjusted, it got pretty expensive - you may find it a lot less expensive to just move.





If you want to talk psychology, then this whole discussion is giving me deja vu of ENGR PSYC 101... and also reminding me of the old theory about the psychology of why some people become liberals while others become conservatives... :'
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 26, 2011, 12:50:43 PM

I'm the one making wrong assumptions??? 
Yep. You are.
And the fact that you have not been able to to do what you want to do, should confirm that fact to you.

Ambient temperature and other environmental factors will effect the "visibility" of the heat source target to the sensor. It will effect depth of field, and it will effect width of field. If a heat source is nearly invisible to the sensor, the heat source will be able to move farther into the field FROM ANY DIRECTION before the sensor will trigger. Continue to deny that all you want, it's becoming humorus.

I suggested the IR movie light source, but like I said, the perimeter you are able to define will only be true for the IR movie light.

Golly, it's nice that people are finding humor in this...  at my expense. :-[

But I gotta say once again that folks are making up their own assertions, and attributing them to me, when I myself made no such claims.  Case in point:  I've never denied that a weak IR source will be (much) more difficult to detect than a strong one!  In fact, The whole point of the question in my original post here was to find out what can be used (as a strong IR source) in order to get around that very problem and produce reliable detections, in order to map the areas that the detectors can "see".  Or, perhaps more relevantly, the areas that they don't ever see.  (I fail to see what I am "denying" in that... nor why it is so hard to get that point across!)

Regarding a movie light source, I apologise if you suggested that, but I must have missed it.  But I do not know what an IR movie light source is... and I'm pretty sure I don't have one laying around here. :'  Sarcasm aside, I was really hoping there might be some sort of common "household item" that would work, although I'm drawing a blank because nothing that comes to mind has worked at all.

Also, I fail to understand why a perimeter that is determined via a strong (enough) IR source would vary for some other source;  Is there some physics to "bending" (or refracting?) IR that I'm unaware of?  (If so, please explain... It sounds like it would be useful for something like stealth camoflage!)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 26, 2011, 02:03:44 PM
I fail to understand why a perimeter that is determined via a strong (enough) IR source would vary for some other source;  
I've never denied that a weak IR source will be (much) more difficult to detect than a strong one!

You talk in circles! You can't have it both ways.

Regarding a movie light source, I apologise if you suggested that, but I must have missed it.  
Here:
http://www.simaproducts.com/products/product_detail.php?product_id=615
But you might want to read my December 21, 2011, 07:26:16 AM comment, because it is still true.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 26, 2011, 06:51:30 PM
I fail to understand why a perimeter that is determined via a strong (enough) IR source would vary for some other source;  
I've never denied that a weak IR source will be (much) more difficult to detect than a strong one!

You talk in circles! You can't have it both ways.


Circles?  ???  Clearly, something is getting lost in the translation - because I get the same feeling.

If one uses an IR source that is strong enough to ensure triggering whenever it moves within the field of view of the sensor (and -presumably- cannot trigger the sensor when the source is moving outside of the sensor's field of view) then how could an even weaker IR source trigger the sensor when such source is outside of the sensor's field of view?  That makes no sense... unless the IR somehow can bend or be refracted or something that I'm not understanding, such that the sensor is able to detect stuff that is outside of its physical boundaries.  It sounds like you're saying that the sensor somehow is capable of picking up IR from virtually anywhere around it...  and I'm not seeing how that can be physically possible.  Please, enlighten me.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 26, 2011, 07:33:34 PM
I think I've adequately attempted to explain but since the explanations seem to be confusing, I'll try the simple route with your original questions...


So, my question is:  Is there any more effective, more definite/reliable, and less time-consuming, method for getting a motion sensor "aligned" to the desired detection area - so that it reacts properly to any motion in the desired area, while ignoring all motion outside of that area?


No.


Quote

Also, what is the best/most reliable way to induce triggering in order to test the alignment?  (I've simply been wandering around in the desired area, and this does not seem to produce consistent results in any way, shape, or form,


There is none. You're doing exactly what the professionals do.


Quote

so I'm wondering whether there is something -maybe a light or reflector?- that I should use in order to get definite triggering results).


Nope. The very nature of PIR detectors is that they give different results under different heat and light variances. They also give different results depending on the size and heat of the subject detected. You may get different field results simply by wearing a different jacket when you re-run the same tests. You may get a different result if you wear or don't wear a hat.

Remember, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

Quote

I sure would appreciate any/all helpful hints, because I'm thoroughly frustrated by my attempts to date. B:(

Thanks in advance!


You're welcome  ;D
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 26, 2011, 08:30:16 PM
Please, enlighten me.
Nope.
I supplied a URL for a strong IR source that you can use to define your perimeters. Which is what you were originally asking for. Buy it, define your perimeters, and enlighten yourself.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 26, 2011, 09:07:34 PM
I think I've adequately attempted to explain but since the explanations seem to be confusing, I'll try the simple route with your original questions...

...
Quote

so I'm wondering whether there is something -maybe a light or reflector?- that I should use in order to get definite triggering results).


Nope. The very nature of PIR detectors is that they give different results under different heat and light variances. They also give different results depending on the size and heat of the subject detected. You may get different field results simply by wearing a different jacket when you re-run the same tests. You may get a different result if you wear or don't wear a hat.

...


Well, please believe me when I reiterate that I certainly do understand the variations of detection under assorted conditions and over time.  I accepted that as a foregone conclusion, due to experience, long before I ever posted my question.  One of the things that I don't understand is why people feel this is a significant issue for the mapping process - which is done over one brief period of time with one specific IR source, both of which should minimize the opportunity for variances to occur.  My expectation would be that if the IR source used is definitive enough to force triggering, it would indeed be possible to roughly determine the lines that divide the areas that the sensor can "see" from those areas that are hidden from the sensor.  If there is actually some reason why this would not occur, I've yet to read a plausible explanation of why.

Note that I fully realize that it is not practical to determine the boundary in terms of depth of field, and I'm not seeking to identify what areas within the field of view are "sweet spots", or are sensitive to particular types of targets, or anything of that nature;  I only want to find out the physical limits of the regions where the sensor could see any IR source under any conditions.  My belief is that if the mapping is done under optimum conditions, using some target that the sensor will no foolin' react to under those conditions, then it ought to be possible to distinguish where the sensor can "see" and where it is "blind".  And my sincere hope is that there is such a source that can be had without breaking the bank.

One other thing that escapes me is why it is that I cannot visually determine the boundaries of the sensor by walking in and out of the field and noting the spots where I stop being able to see the lens of the sensor around some limiting obstruction - such as a masking object.  If anything, it seems this should be a conservative determination of the blind area, because the unmasked lens is visible well past the 45 degrees from center that is specified as the sensor's physical limit of detectable area, which implies that the entire lens does not need to be hidden from view in order for that observation point to be out of the detectable area.  Again, I don't see the reason.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 26, 2011, 09:12:50 PM
<sigh>  B:(
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 26, 2011, 09:48:16 PM
 rofl
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 26, 2011, 11:02:55 PM
<sigh>  B:(

Yeah, well it seems to me that I'm talking to a wall... ::)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: beelocks on December 27, 2011, 12:37:51 AM

With regard to speaking to a wall, I think you should try it.

Perhaps if you stand and talk to the wall for long enough it will come up with what you need. On the other hand, the wall may also get pissed off and walk away.


This one's all yours now Dave, I'm gonna make like a wall and leave.  :)%
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 27, 2011, 10:11:31 AM

With regard to speaking to a wall, I think you should try it.

Perhaps if you stand and talk to the wall for long enough it will come up with what you need. On the other hand, the wall may also get pissed off and walk away.


This one's all yours now Dave, I'm gonna make like a wall and leave.  :)%

I'm sorry if you feel I am pig-headed, but much of what has been claimed and suggested here flies in the face of what I've learned in school and through experience, so I was trying to reconcile those discrepancies.  Apparently, that's not to be.  <sigh>
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on December 27, 2011, 11:21:34 AM
In this thread, there are three pages of you, in effect, saying "no, I don't believe you". So take your experience and what you've learned in school and fix your problem.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 28, 2011, 02:10:55 PM
In this thread, there are three pages of you, in effect, saying "no, I don't believe you". So take your experience and what you've learned in school and fix your problem.

If that's what it seemed, then I apologise for giving that impression.  I was trying to convey that it did not make sense (in the context of my knowledge and experience), so I was hoping someone would elaborate so as to explain the discrepancy.  In other words, to give someone an opportunity to correct my allegedly "faulty" understanding.  Since that did not happen, I can only assume my understanding was actually correct.

Please understand that I have already wasted big bucks cumulatively on this project due to taking other people's unsupported claims at face value - even though against my learning and experience - because those people were in a position where they should know what they were talking about, but obviously in retrospect they did not.  So, I'm now extremely reluctant to go with anything that seems inconsistent, until those inconsistencies can be cleared up;  consequently I try to discuss the reasoning in hopes of resolving any misunderstandings.  It's frustrating that nobody seems willing to do that... or else they are not understanding my concerns.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on December 28, 2011, 02:33:09 PM
... In other words, to give someone an opportunity to correct my allegedly "faulty" understanding.  Since that did not happen, I can only assume my understanding was actually correct.
I don't understand that logic. From the way I see it, you're saying that although the system is not doing what you THINK it should (based on information that you now know may be wildly inaccurate), since nobody can tell you WHY that is happening, then the false information you were given MUST be correct? MAybe nobody here has an answer for you, so they are staying quiet, instead of saying "I don't have an answer for you".

Quote
Please understand that I have already wasted big bucks cumulatively on this project due to taking other people's unsupported claims at face value - even though against my learning and experience - because those people were in a position where they should know what they were talking about, but obviously in retrospect they did not. 
Are you referring to anyone BESIDES the X10 sales staff? Did any of the other users here give you bad information, which caused you to go out and spend more money?

Quote
So, I'm now extremely reluctant to go with anything that seems inconsistent, until those inconsistencies can be cleared up;  consequently I try to discuss the reasoning in hopes of resolving any misunderstandings.  It's frustrating that nobody seems willing to do that... or else they are not understanding my concerns.
Well, I can understand wanting to try and figure out what's going on, especially when things just don't seem to make sense.
From my understanding, IR motion sensors in general are affected by temperature, light, etc. Since they are looking for variations in the IR pattern they see, a person's body heat would be easier to spot against the background on a very cold day, than it would be on a very hot day.
I like to think of this similar to dropping a grey Lego piece dropped on a grey carpet vs. a red carpet. You might find it on the grey carpet, but you'll have to get a lot closer to pick it out of the background. You should be able to see it at a greater distance if it falls on a red carpet, since the color contrast is greater.

Since X10's motion sensors are not very expensive devices, I am guessing their detection window sensitivity might be more prone to variations based on environmental conditions than other very expensive units.

I wonder if "beam-breaker" type of motion sensors (the ones where you break the invisible beam to trigger them) might work better, and with more consistency. Of course, since X10 doesn't have any of those, you'd need to find another way to tie them into your system (perhaps using PowerFlash modules, or hacked security sensors).
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 28, 2011, 03:30:03 PM
... In other words, to give someone an opportunity to correct my allegedly "faulty" understanding.  Since that did not happen, I can only assume my understanding was actually correct.
I don't understand that logic. From the way I see it, you're saying that although the system is not doing what you THINK it should (based on information that you now know may be wildly inaccurate), since nobody can tell you WHY that is happening, then the false information you were given MUST be correct? MAybe nobody here has an answer for you, so they are staying quiet, instead of saying "I don't have an answer for you".

Well, it's clear that I'm not on the same page with some others - for some reason.  My assumption is that reason is due to a misunderstanding of some kind.  However, when people attack my intelligence or claim that I am ignorant rather than explaining their reasoning, then I am left to conclude that my understanding may actually be correct, and they may simply be "blowing smoke" for motives that I could only guess at.  (It's stuff right out of ENGR PSYC 101).

Quote
Quote
Please understand that I have already wasted big bucks cumulatively on this project due to taking other people's unsupported claims at face value - even though against my learning and experience - because those people were in a position where they should know what they were talking about, but obviously in retrospect they did not. 
Are you referring to anyone BESIDES the X10 sales staff?

Yes - well, depending on how you define "sales" staff.

Quote
Did any of the other users here give you bad information, which caused you to go out and spend more money?

Not that I'm AWARE of - although I can't say whether anyone here might be the same as who induced me to buy stuff that did not do what they claimed it would.

It has been suggested here, however, that I buy certain ghastly expensive piece of equipment to "try"... after the same person implied earlier that it would not work anyway.


Quote
Quote
So, I'm now extremely reluctant to go with anything that seems inconsistent, until those inconsistencies can be cleared up;  consequently I try to discuss the reasoning in hopes of resolving any misunderstandings.  It's frustrating that nobody seems willing to do that... or else they are not understanding my concerns.
Well, I can understand wanting to try and figure out what's going on, especially when things just don't seem to make sense.
From my understanding, IR motion sensors in general are affected by temperature, light, etc. Since they are looking for variations in the IR pattern they see, a person's body heat would be easier to spot against the background on a very cold day, than it would be on a very hot day.
I like to think of this similar to dropping a grey Lego piece dropped on a grey carpet vs. a red carpet. You might find it on the grey carpet, but you'll have to get a lot closer to pick it out of the background. You should be able to see it at a greater distance if it falls on a red carpet, since the color contrast is greater.

That's the rub:  I'm already aware of those issues, but I see them as operational problems - that should be mostly irrelevant for the edge-of-field mapping scenario that I'm trying to do... UNLESS the propagation behavior of IR is vastly different from what I have learned it to be.


Quote
Since X10's motion sensors are not very expensive devices, I am guessing their detection window sensitivity might be more prone to variations based on environmental conditions than other very expensive units.

Of that, I have no doubt whatsoever... and can readily confirm it from my own experiences, along with anecdotal evidence from most everyone else.

Quote
I wonder if "beam-breaker" type of motion sensors (the ones where you break the invisible beam to trigger them) might work better, and with more consistency. Of course, since X10 doesn't have any of those, you'd need to find another way to tie them into your system (perhaps using PowerFlash modules, or hacked security sensors).

We've explored that option on-site, and found it to be nonviable for several reasons, not the least of which is the problem and expense of replacing the X10 motion sensors with all the stuff that is needed to make the beam-breakers work.  We even tried to "fudge" a beam-breaking approach by using a heavily-masked X10 floodlight sensor and an IR source, but this proved to be a wild goose chase.

Anyway, the beam-breakers would be useful only in certain types of areas, so I'd still have to deal with the other types of areas somehow.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on December 28, 2011, 05:50:56 PM
Quote
Quote
Please understand that I have already wasted big bucks cumulatively on this project due to taking other people's unsupported claims at face value - even though against my learning and experience - because those people were in a position where they should know what they were talking about, but obviously in retrospect they did not. 
Are you referring to anyone BESIDES the X10 sales staff?
Yes - well, depending on how you define "sales" staff.
The definition I was using in that context is "those people who work for X10, who are involved with selling you products sold by X10."

Quote
Quote
Did any of the other users here give you bad information, which caused you to go out and spend more money?

Not that I'm AWARE of - although I can't say whether anyone here might be the same as who induced me to buy stuff that did not do what they claimed it would.
Well, since there are only a few X10 employees who contribute to these forums, and very rarely at that, I don't think any of the people here are the same ones at X10 who " induced [you] to buy stuff that did not do what they claimed it would". Just to be sure, though, I went back through this thread and the other one (about the macro triggers), and did not see any posts from any of the X10 staff.

Quote
It has been suggested here, however, that I buy certain ghastly expensive piece of equipment to "try"... after the same person implied earlier that it would not work anyway.
Sorry, can't help you on that one.

Quote
Quote
Quote
So, I'm now extremely reluctant to go with anything that seems inconsistent, until those inconsistencies can be cleared up;  consequently I try to discuss the reasoning in hopes of resolving any misunderstandings.  It's frustrating that nobody seems willing to do that... or else they are not understanding my concerns.
Well, I can understand wanting to try and figure out what's going on, especially when things just don't seem to make sense.
From my understanding, IR motion sensors in general are affected by temperature, light, etc. Since they are looking for variations in the IR pattern they see, a person's body heat would be easier to spot against the background on a very cold day, than it would be on a very hot day.
I like to think of this similar to dropping a grey Lego piece dropped on a grey carpet vs. a red carpet. You might find it on the grey carpet, but you'll have to get a lot closer to pick it out of the background. You should be able to see it at a greater distance if it falls on a red carpet, since the color contrast is greater.
That's the rub:  I'm already aware of those issues, but I see them as operational problems - that should be mostly irrelevant for the edge-of-field mapping scenario that I'm trying to do... UNLESS the propagation behavior of IR is vastly different from what I have learned it to be.
Once again, I don't have any experience with X10's motion sensors, but I have to imagine that since the sensor's ability to detect things changes with the weather, the EDGE of the field of vision can change, too. Think about my LEGO example. Looking out of the corner of your eye, and rotating your head toward the place where you dropped the LEGO, you'll see it sooner on the red carpet than on the gray carpet. The edge of YOUR detection window is not absolute, it is related to the ability to process the image you are seeing. If the image has low contrast, it is harder to process.

Quote
Quote
Since X10's motion sensors are not very expensive devices, I am guessing their detection window sensitivity might be more prone to variations based on environmental conditions than other very expensive units.
Of that, I have no doubt whatsoever... and can readily confirm it from my own experiences, along with anecdotal evidence from most everyone else.

Quote
I wonder if "beam-breaker" type of motion sensors (the ones where you break the invisible beam to trigger them) might work better, and with more consistency. Of course, since X10 doesn't have any of those, you'd need to find another way to tie them into your system (perhaps using PowerFlash modules, or hacked security sensors).
We've explored that option on-site, and found it to be nonviable for several reasons, not the least of which is the problem and expense of replacing the X10 motion sensors with all the stuff that is needed to make the beam-breakers work.  We even tried to "fudge" a beam-breaking approach by using a heavily-masked X10 floodlight sensor and an IR source, but this proved to be a wild goose chase.
Anyway, the beam-breakers would be useful only in certain types of areas, so I'd still have to deal with the other types of areas somehow.
It was only a suggestion. Beam-breakers generally have a much narrower detection area than motion sensors, and could be triggered by things like blowing leaves or small animals (that probably wouldn't trigger an IR motion sensor).
One other thing you might try, is to speak to an alarm company. They install a lot of different types of motion sensors, and they might be able to give you some pointers for how to aim and map them.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 29, 2011, 11:40:48 AM
Quote
Quote
Please understand that I have already wasted big bucks cumulatively on this project due to taking other people's unsupported claims at face value - even though against my learning and experience - because those people were in a position where they should know what they were talking about, but obviously in retrospect they did not. 
Are you referring to anyone BESIDES the X10 sales staff?
Yes - well, depending on how you define "sales" staff.
The definition I was using in that context is "those people who work for X10, who are involved with selling you products sold by X10."

In that case, I'd have to change my reply to a qualified "No" - based on the assumption that everyone who works for X10 has a vested interest in selling more product.  (My original reply was based on the assumption that you meant only X10 reps who were titled as "sales" staff).

Quote
Quote
Quote
Did any of the other users here give you bad information, which caused you to go out and spend more money?

Not that I'm AWARE of - although I can't say whether anyone here might be the same as who induced me to buy stuff that did not do what they claimed it would.
Well, since there are only a few X10 employees who contribute to these forums, and very rarely at that, I don't think any of the people here are the same ones at X10 who " induced [you] to buy stuff that did not do what they claimed it would". Just to be sure, though, I went back through this thread and the other one (about the macro triggers), and did not see any posts from any of the X10 staff.

That was my assumption, but I had no way of proving it.

Quote
...Once again, I don't have any experience with X10's motion sensors, but I have to imagine that since the sensor's ability to detect things changes with the weather, the EDGE of the field of vision can change, too. Think about my LEGO example. Looking out of the corner of your eye, and rotating your head toward the place where you dropped the LEGO, you'll see it sooner on the red carpet than on the gray carpet. The edge of YOUR detection window is not absolute, it is related to the ability to process the image you are seeing. If the image has low contrast, it is harder to process.

Contrary to popular opinion, I've never disputed the liklihood that there there will be variance of detectability within the field of view, rather my need boils down to finding out where the sensors' views are blocked - so that I can orient or mask the sensors such that only the blocked areas of one sensor overlay the viewable areas of the other sensors, or in simplest terms, to configure things so that only one sensor can physically "see" any given area (or else do something very clever with macros in order to "triangulate" the target based on multiple "simultaneous" triggers - a complexity that I would prefer to avoid ::)).

Quote
One other thing you might try, is to speak to an alarm company. They install a lot of different types of motion sensors, and they might be able to give you some pointers for how to aim and map them.

Thanks for that suggestion! :)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on December 29, 2011, 01:21:07 PM
Quote
The definition I was using in that context is "those people who work for X10, who are involved with selling you products sold by X10."
In that case, I'd have to change my reply to a qualified "No" - based on the assumption that everyone who works for X10 has a vested interest in selling more product.  (My original reply was based on the assumption that you meant only X10 reps who were titled as "sales" staff).
Perhaps I should have referred to them simply as "X10 staff" from the beginning.  ;)

Quote
Quote
...Once again, I don't have any experience with X10's motion sensors, but I have to imagine that since the sensor's ability to detect things changes with the weather, the EDGE of the field of vision can change, too. Think about my LEGO example. Looking out of the corner of your eye, and rotating your head toward the place where you dropped the LEGO, you'll see it sooner on the red carpet than on the gray carpet. The edge of YOUR detection window is not absolute, it is related to the ability to process the image you are seeing. If the image has low contrast, it is harder to process.
Contrary to popular opinion, I've never disputed the liklihood that there there will be variance of detectability within the field of view, rather my need boils down to finding out where the sensors' views are blocked - so that I can orient or mask the sensors such that only the blocked areas of one sensor overlay the viewable areas of the other sensors, or in simplest terms, to configure things so that only one sensor can physically "see" any given area (or else do something very clever with macros in order to "triangulate" the target based on multiple "simultaneous" triggers - a complexity that I would prefer to avoid ::)).
Well, I suppose you can use some black tape to mask the sensor window, and then try to trigger it. Since I don't think it will detect anything where it is masked, you might be able to better define the edges of its field of view that way. It would take a lot of trial-and-error, but it might be the only way to go.
For testing, you might want to set an appliance module to the same HC/UC as the sensor, and use it to turn on a light or radio - something that will alert you when you trigger the sensor.

Quote
Quote
One other thing you might try, is to speak to an alarm company. They install a lot of different types of motion sensors, and they might be able to give you some pointers for how to aim and map them.
Thanks for that suggestion! :)
That might be your best option to move forward with this. I don't think any of the users here have the extensive experience installing and file-tuning PIR detectors that you seem to need to resolve this.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 29, 2011, 06:36:19 PM
Well, I suppose you can use some black tape to mask the sensor window, and then try to trigger it. Since I don't think it will detect anything where it is masked, you might be able to better define the edges of its field of view that way. It would take a lot of trial-and-error, but it might be the only way to go.

We're kind of coming full-circle here:  Black tape is one of the means that I use when trying to control the sensors' fields of view.  (The other typical material is aluminum flashing, depending on the geometry of the required "mask").  Anyway, my need is to determine where to position the masks, based on testing for the edges of the sensor's field while the masks are adjusted in various ways.  To accomplish this "mapping", I find that I need to find a way to force a trigger of the sensor when the target is within the sensor's view (and not trigger when the target is outside the sensor's view - like behind the masks, etc.)  Figuring how to do that reliably is what led to this entire "discussion".

The suggested IR-LED light source seems as though it should work for a positive trigger, but I would think that other IR-LED sources would work (like the illuminator from a game camera or a night vision camera, or an IR remote, or even just an IR-LED itself), but apparently the sensors are oblivious to these other IR-LED sources, so I'd have to guess that the movie light would be no better - although it is baffling as to why the other IR-LED devices don't work.

Quote
For testing, you might want to set an appliance module to the same HC/UC as the sensor, and use it to turn on a light or radio - something that will alert you when you trigger the sensor.

That would work, although when the floodlight sensors have floodlights installed, and are configured to turn on the floodlights based on the motion sensor (instead of by the dusk/dawn sensor) then the lights will reveal the status of the sensor.  Even with the floodlights removed (for a sensor-only configuration), usually it is possible to hear the internal floodlight relay clicking - although it can be confusing as to whether the relay is turning on or off under some circumstances.  I probably should take the effort to do something along the lines of your suggestion in order to "positively" know the status, in order to avoid confusion.  I'd really like to have "field access" to the equivalent of the AHP Activity Log - in order to see if there might be any unexpected signals going on that may be adding to the confusion while trying to do mapping operations... although I don't know how that could be accomplished.

Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on December 29, 2011, 06:41:26 PM
I'd really like to have "field access" to the equivalent of the AHP Activity Log - in order to see if there might be any unexpected signals going on that may be adding to the confusion while trying to do mapping operations... although I don't know how that could be accomplished.
There is an example using the SDK, and there are other 3rd-party (free) utilities, that will watch the line, and log commands to a file, etc.
Use a laptop to look at these in real-time.
Or, you could just use something like VNC or LogMeIn to directly watch the AHP activity log from a laptop.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 30, 2011, 12:55:05 PM
I'd really like to have "field access" to the equivalent of the AHP Activity Log - in order to see if there might be any unexpected signals going on that may be adding to the confusion while trying to do mapping operations... although I don't know how that could be accomplished.
There is an example using the SDK, and there are other 3rd-party (free) utilities, that will watch the line, and log commands to a file, etc.
Use a laptop to look at these in real-time.
Or, you could just use something like VNC or LogMeIn to directly watch the AHP activity log from a laptop.

I'm not sure I follow how this would be done "out in the yard".  Wouldn't I either have to get another computer to network to the laptop/notebook that I'd carrying around... or else drag the CM15A around with me (on an extension cord or something).  Unfortunately, I don't have another computer that would be capable of a wireless network connection to the laptop/notebook.  Dragging the CM15A and extension cords, etc. along with a portable PC would be possible - but not very convenient (especially if I'm also serving as the IR "target" while doing this).  Or, am I just missing something?
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on December 30, 2011, 01:20:05 PM
I'd really like to have "field access" to the equivalent of the AHP Activity Log - in order to see if there might be any unexpected signals going on that may be adding to the confusion while trying to do mapping operations... although I don't know how that could be accomplished.
There is an example using the SDK, and there are other 3rd-party (free) utilities, that will watch the line, and log commands to a file, etc.
Use a laptop to look at these in real-time.
Or, you could just use something like VNC or LogMeIn to directly watch the AHP activity log from a laptop.

I'm not sure I follow how this would be done "out in the yard".  Wouldn't I either have to get another computer to network to the laptop/notebook that I'd carrying around... or else drag the CM15A around with me (on an extension cord or something).  Unfortunately, I don't have another computer that would be capable of a wireless network connection to the laptop/notebook.  Dragging the CM15A and extension cords, etc. along with a portable PC would be possible - but not very convenient (especially if I'm also serving as the IR "target" while doing this).  Or, am I just missing something?
Maybe I'm missing something. You want to have "field access" to the AHP Activity Monitor (or an equivalent listing of commands as they happen), but you want to do it WITHOUT a computer? In order to collect the data, you NEED a PC connected to the CM15A, with AHP installed. Moving the CM15A from its "standard" location (using a long extension cord) might cause other issues (signal/noise, RF reception, etc), that could potentially skew your testing results. So, you would need some sort of method to remotely see what's going on with the CM15A.
I don't know all that much about the various SDK-created programs, but there probably is something out there that will create a log of everything SEPARATELY from AHP, to a text file. If you have a web server you could post that to, or use a network share, you could then use some sort of network-enabled device (a different computer, smartphone, tablet, etc) to view that data as it is being created. If you don't have another device you can use, perhaps you can find a helper, who can sit in front of the AHP computer, and give you updates via walkie-talkie/cell phone/yelling out the window/etc. In fact, that might be a good option as you don't need to keep looking at a laptop screen, and you don't need to worry about wifi signal strength outdoors.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: IPS on December 30, 2011, 02:32:59 PM
MD Corie

After reading four pages of this interesting dialog, I thought I put in my two bits as well. Following is my experience with X10 motion sensors, floodcams and flood lights.

Sensors: indoor: They work fine till the batteries weaken or room temperature is low, then it will take more than one movement to activate it.
             Outdoor: unreliable in summer or winter, I live in Quebec. In summer due to heat and hot air flowing past the sensor and in winter because of reflection from snow. Last summer I  installed a piece of black hard plastic on top of the eye sensor unit (sensor is black in color). The performance has improved a lot. I get very few false alarms in summer and it is working in winter as well. Field of vision of the sensor also has shortened, I haven't measured the angle of vision but judging from the low number of false alarms, I would say there is a big improvement. I am surprised to see it working for the first time in -15C.

Flood Cams. Have a very low video range. They work in summer. And in winter, specially where I live, at time I could not switch them off, not even manually. So their electronics is not suitable to winter. They must be installed on a firm base or it will keep on triggering. Field of vision is about 45 degree and you'll be lucky if your CM15A gets the signal from a distance of 25 ft.

Flood lights are basically the same. I prefer lights sold in electrical stores. They seem to work for ever, summer or winter.

For surveillance around my property, I recently switched to IP cameras and they seem to be a much better choice. In fact X10 is marketing the same under a different name. X10 flood cams are useless at night but some IP cameras have  IR lights that light up to 100 ft. And sensitivy can be adjusted as well.

May be you want to look at them for your need.

 I don't know if that is of any use to you or not  but this is my experience with these units.

Have a happy new Year and may be you'll find an answer to you question.

IPS

Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 31, 2011, 11:17:48 AM
... You want to have "field access" to the AHP Activity Monitor (or an equivalent listing of commands as they happen), but you want to do it WITHOUT a computer? ...

I'm not sure where that notion came from, but my assumption was that I'd be "carrying around" a portable PC of some sort while doing the testing in order to monitor the RF and PLC activity.  (Mainly interested in the PLC relating to the sensors, but I wanted to see if there was anything else going on that might cause confusion in the test results - because I frequently see off/on behavior that seems unattributable to any actual target movement).  I suppose I would not be literally carrying the computer with me at all times, but would set it down nearby where I could check it as needed.

I don't have any wireless-capable computers other than a sub-notebook... nor even a wireless network.  That's what I was getting at as far as not having anything available to "transmit" the log data to the field PC.


Quote
... If you don't have another device you can use, perhaps you can find a helper, who can sit in front of the AHP computer, and give you updates via walkie-talkie/cell phone/yelling out the window/etc. In fact, that might be a good option as you don't need to keep looking at a laptop screen, and you don't need to worry about wifi signal strength outdoors.

Unfortunately, my usual helper passed away recently, and I have yet to find anyone else who is available - especially at this time of year.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on December 31, 2011, 11:47:55 AM
After reading four pages of this interesting dialog, I thought I put in my two bits as well. Following is my experience with X10 motion sensors, floodcams and flood lights.

Thank you for sharing your experiences.  I'm especially curious about some of your comments:

Quote
Sensors: indoor: They work fine till the batteries weaken or room temperature is low, then it will take more than one movement to activate it.
             Outdoor: unreliable in summer or winter, I live in Quebec. In summer due to heat and hot air flowing past the sensor and in winter because of reflection from snow. Last summer I  installed a piece of black hard plastic on top of the eye sensor unit (sensor is black in color). The performance has improved a lot. I get very few false alarms in summer and it is working in winter as well. Field of vision of the sensor also has shortened, I haven't measured the angle of vision but judging from the low number of false alarms, I would say there is a big improvement. I am surprised to see it working for the first time in -15C.

Although I am not using wireless motion sensors (such as the XxxxEye models) outdoors, I have tested them for that purpose.  My experiences with them are totally consistent with yours... but I am intrigued by your mention of putting a black plastic piece of plastic on the sensor and getting fewer false triggers as a result.  Please describe what you did in more detail, as it might be helpful here, too.


Quote
Flood Cams. Have a very low video range. ... lucky if your CM15A gets the signal from a distance of 25 ft.

I have no experience with the FloodCams.  I almost bought one once to try, but realized that they have some inherent limitations/restrictions that would make them unsuited for most of my applications.  I do experience the limited RF signal range that you mentioned, but on different devices.


Quote
Flood lights are basically the same. I prefer lights sold in electrical stores. They seem to work for ever, summer or winter.

Not sure whether you are referring to the X10 Motion Sensor FloodLights here, but that's what I have for about 50% of my floodlights.  However, only about 75% of my units actually have floodlights on them;  the rest are just the sensor heads, which I use for 100% of my outdoor motion sensing functions.  I have experienced about a 10% failure rate on these units, over a couple of years... but they seem to function (more or less) in all types of weather.


One thing that your comments brought to mind is the question of whether the motion sensors "flutter" in the wind, and thus create false triggering due to their own movements.  I hadn't considered this possibility before, but I do notice that false triggers occur mostly during breezy, partly cloudy conditions.  My assumption was that such falsies were due to the changes of IR as the shadows from passing clouds went across the viewing areas... but if the sensors themselves move in the breezes, then it is entirely plausible that they are producing self-induced triggers!  Wow!
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 01, 2012, 04:45:29 PM

The PIRs depend upon seeing a MOVING heat differential.   

I assume this means a moving IR source.  I am no sensor expert but I what I have read about them looks like there is an IR detector with lenses that focus IR onto the detector.  When a warm body moves around where the sensor is looking, its IR gets focused on the detector sometimes and gets focused off of the detector at other times.  This causes the IR intensity on the detector to change, and triggers the sensor.  (Do I understand this correctly?  If I do, then read on).

IR LED sources were mentioned somewhere in this thread, and I got wondering whether a stationary IR LED source would trigger the detector if its LEDs were simply turned on and off, without being moved around.  If this would work, maybe it could help solve the problem here.  Or not.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on January 01, 2012, 07:50:55 PM
I assume this means a moving IR source.  I am no sensor expert but I what I have read about them looks like there is an IR detector with lenses that focus IR onto the detector.  When a warm body moves around where the sensor is looking, its IR gets focused on the detector sometimes and gets focused off of the detector at other times.  This causes the IR intensity on the detector to change, and triggers the sensor.  (Do I understand this correctly?  If I do, then read on).

IR LED sources were mentioned somewhere in this thread, and I got wondering whether a stationary IR LED source would trigger the detector if its LEDs were simply turned on and off, without being moved around.  If this would work, maybe it could help solve the problem here.  Or not.
Yes.
Don't know if ON-OFF would do it or not, but an interesting idea. I suggested the IR video light because the OP kept asking for a "tool" to precisly define the sensors borders. As I pointed out, the video camera IR source would probably trigger the sensors more reliably, but (also pointed out) the camera IR source defined borders will probably not be the same as when a warm body would cause the sensor to trigger.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 03, 2012, 09:26:07 AM
...
IR LED sources were mentioned somewhere in this thread, and I got wondering whether a stationary IR LED source would trigger the detector if its LEDs were simply turned on and off, without being moved around.  If this would work, maybe it could help solve the problem here.  Or not.
Don't know if ON-OFF would do it or not, but an interesting idea. I suggested the IR video light because the OP kept asking for a "tool" to precisly define the sensors borders. As I pointed out, the video camera IR source would probably trigger the sensors more reliably, but (also pointed out) the camera IR source defined borders will probably not be the same as when a warm body would cause the sensor to trigger.

IF the sensors would detect the IR-LED source, then I think the idea of turning a stationary source on and off might be a more reliable way to do it - because it would avoid any false detections due to the testor moving, which may or may not introduce additional variance.

The problem for me is, my attempts with IR-LED sources indicate that the sensors don't respond to them any differently than they do to me just walking around without any IR source in hand.  So, the concern implicit in that was whether this "IR video light" differs somehow from other IR-LED sources (such as discrete IR-LEDs, IR remote controls, IR-LED illuminators from game cameras (aka trail cameras), "night vision" cameras, and so forth) - because, if it is essentially the same thing as far as the motion sensors are concerned, then it seems it would be just a further waste of time and money.  On the other hand, if the sensors do react much better to this device than to other IR-LED sources, then it likely would be worth a try.  But, I'd also be very interested in knowing why it works better than other IR-LED sources, because that is not logically apparent to me.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on January 03, 2012, 09:43:36 AM
But, I'd also be very interested in knowing why it works better than other IR-LED sources, because that is not logically apparent to me.
How do the motion sensors work? Do they emit IR, and look for reflected pulses, or do they look for radiated energy coming off an object?
Perhaps pointing an IR light source at them isn't workng, because it is a different frequency than the detector is looking to see bounced back.

If they look for changed in a detected heat pattern, perhaps mounting a hair dryer on a stand, and aiming it at the detector might create a "burst" of heat that the detector might pick up.
I'm imagine there is probably a way to then put that stand on wheels (perhaps an A/V tripod, or something low-tech like a rolling office chair), and move it slowly into the field of view of the detector, to see where it triggers?
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 03, 2012, 10:20:54 AM
But, I'd also be very interested in knowing why it works better than other IR-LED sources, because that is not logically apparent to me.
How do the motion sensors work? Do they emit IR, and look for reflected pulses, or do they look for radiated energy coming off an object?
Perhaps pointing an IR light source at them isn't workng, because it is a different frequency than the detector is looking to see bounced back.

That's a good question!  My understanding (which people seem to feel is generally "defective") is that the sensors are "passive" and only look at changes in the ambient IR "background" - in which case, any strong IR source ought to get a reaction out of them.

Quote
If they look for changed in a detected heat pattern, perhaps mounting a hair dryer on a stand, and aiming it at the detector might create a "burst" of heat that the detector might pick up.
I'm imagine there is probably a way to then put that stand on wheels (perhaps an A/V tripod, or something low-tech like a rolling office chair), and move it slowly into the field of view of the detector, to see where it triggers?

That hair dryer idea is intriguing.  That's one potential IR source that I hadn't thought of - and it's quick and easy to do with on-hand household items (so it meets my criteria ;)).  I'll give that a try and see what happens.  Thanks!

Unfortunately, it won't really test the stationary on/off scenario - because the hair dryer will have some heat-up/cool-down hysteresis, so it wouldn't work well as a "snap switch" like an IR-LED source should... but it certainly should be appropriate for the moving-source scenario.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on January 03, 2012, 11:06:23 AM
...My understanding (which people seem to feel is generally "defective") is that the sensors are "passive" and only look at changes in the ambient IR "background" - in which case, any strong IR source ought to get a reaction out of them.
As long as the frequency of your IR source is in a range that it can detect.

Quote
That hair dryer idea is intriguing.  That's one potential IR source that I hadn't thought of - and it's quick and easy to do with on-hand household items (so it meets my criteria ;)).  I'll give that a try and see what happens.  Thanks!

Unfortunately, it won't really test the stationary on/off scenario - because the hair dryer will have some heat-up/cool-down hysteresis, so it wouldn't work well as a "snap switch" like an IR-LED source should... but it certainly should be appropriate for the moving-source scenario.
Perhaps you could block it with some heat-resistant material? Like one of those silicone baking dishes?
Another option might be to leave the heat source stationary, and rotate the motion sensor around it. Using a protractor, you *should* be able to get an idea of the field of view it has.
Then, you could mount it and estimate the edges of the field, and test them again by moving the source.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 03, 2012, 12:20:28 PM
...My understanding (which people seem to feel is generally "defective") is that the sensors are "passive" and only look at changes in the ambient IR "background" - in which case, any strong IR source ought to get a reaction out of them.
As long as the frequency of your IR source is in a range that it can detect.

Another good question!  Unfortunately, I don't recall ever seeing the wavelength specs anywhere.  (Anybody know?)

Quote
... you could mount it and estimate the edges of the field, and test them again by moving the source.

That's essentially the point that I'm at in the process;  that is, I've mounted the sensors and am trying to define the areas they can actually "see" (with masks, as needed), so I can make sure there is no overlap (hopefully), and in some cases, to make them non-reactive to irrelevent motion that occurs in nearby off-premises areas.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Noam on January 03, 2012, 01:13:43 PM
That's essentially the point that I'm at in the process;  that is, I've mounted the sensors and am trying to define the areas they can actually "see" (with masks, as needed), so I can make sure there is no overlap (hopefully), and in some cases, to make them non-reactive to irrelevent motion that occurs in nearby off-premises areas.
I'm guessing that the "no overlap" is so that you don't have two sensors starting up the same macro?
I know your macro setup is already pretty complex (by AHP / CM15A standards, at least), but I suppose you could use flags to prevent double-triggering of the macros. Of course, with only 16 flags available, you might not have enough to cover all your macro scenarios.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 03, 2012, 06:08:18 PM
I'm guessing that the "no overlap" is so that you don't have two sensors starting up the same macro?

Actually, I'm wanting no overlap so that the system can determine which camera to turn on, based on where the motion is detected.  (Specifically, it is to determine which individual macro should be triggered, which, in turn, activates the appropriate camera - among other actions).

Quote
... I know your macro setup is already pretty complex (by AHP / CM15A standards, at least), but I suppose you could use flags to prevent double-triggering of the macros. Of course, with only 16 flags available, you might not have enough to cover all your macro scenarios.
The response macros are triggered by individual H-U codes from each sensor, and are prevented from re-triggering by conditions set for the monitored H-U codes of lights, each of which is controlled by the respective macro.  So there is no problem of double-triggering the sensor-response macros.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 04, 2012, 12:16:03 PM
I hesitate to post suggestions because I am no expert and only have some experience to offer.  Also, I think what I have to suggest may be obvious anyway, but please bear with me because my suggestion has raised some questions in my mind that maybe someone can answer.

I have observed that my sensors seem to trigger easily from cars and trucks on a nearby road, but only when it is relatively dark.  My thinking is the sensors detect the headlights or maybe even the running lights of the cars and trucks, so I was going to suggest trying an automotive light bulb to trigger the sensors.

But then I realized something that seems contradictory, and so it turns my suggestion into a question instead.  The contradiction is that even though my sensors seem to react well to the traffic on the nearby road, they often do not respond to cars in my own driveway, which runs nearly parallel to the road, but about 30' closer to the sensors.  I do not understand this.  Can anyone explain why this happens?  It seems like lights in the driveway, being closer to the sensors, would appear more intense and also give more horizontal movement, which is what triggers the sensors as I understand things.

Anyway, I have two questions:

Do the motion sensors actually react to automotive lights, or are they triggering on something else?

Why do the sensors trigger much better on cars and trucks that are on the road, which is further away, than they do for cars and trucks in my driveway, which is closer to the sensors?  My driveway averages about 35' away from the two motion sensors, and the road is at least another 30' beyond my driveway.  I believe even the driveway is beyond the specified range of the sensors anyway, and the road is almost twice as far, so things do not make sense to me.

PS:  I really do not want the sensors to detect the traffic on the road, but if they detect traffic in my driveway, that would be OK.  Any suggestions how I could get the sensors to give that desired result?  Thanks!
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 05, 2012, 01:12:56 PM
Anyway, I have two questions:

Do the motion sensors actually react to automotive lights, or are they triggering on something else?

Concensus says that I don't know much either, but I'll pass along my experience regarding this, FWIW:

I don't think they respond to the automotive lights... at least, mine do not seem particularly responsive to light bulbs.  I once tried to find ways to detect cars as they were approaching my house.  In that process, as far as I could tell, the sensors respond to the cars even less at night when their lights are on.  So, my guess is that the sensors are oblivious to car lights.

Quote
Why do the sensors trigger much better on cars and trucks that are on the road, which is further away, than they do for cars and trucks in my driveway, which is closer to the sensors?  My driveway averages about 35' away from the two motion sensors, and the road is at least another 30' beyond my driveway.  I believe even the driveway is beyond the specified range of the sensors anyway, and the road is almost twice as far, so things do not make sense to me.

Unfortunately, I suspect that is due to one of the quirks of the motion sensors.  I have seen cases where nothing at all beyond 25' would cause a sensor to trigger... but I've also seen cases where sensors trigger fairly reliably on things that are 100'-150' away.  Apparently, there is considerable variability in the response of the individual sensors.  So, if you have other sensors, you might try swapping them to see if it changes the result, or maybe changing their aiming angle (if possible) - although, I don't know why they would miss nearby stuff if they pick up stuff that is farther away.

Quote
PS:  I really do not want the sensors to detect the traffic on the road, but if they detect traffic in my driveway, that would be OK.  Any suggestions how I could get the sensors to give that desired result?  Thanks!

Are you using the X10 floodlight sensors?  If so, try adjusting the sensitivity ("range") setting, or change the aiming angle (downwards).  If you're using other sensors, see if there is any comparable adjustment(s) that you can tweek.  One extreme option - that probably isn't practical - might be to put up some sort of wall or obstable between your driveway and the road... although others here have claimed that the sensors can "see" around obstacles!  How that works is beyond my understanding, though. ::)

It may be that you're just running into the extreme quirkiness of the motion sensors, though... so there may not be any straighforward explanation... nor any easy fix.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: IPS on January 06, 2012, 06:07:55 AM
MD Curie
When I said, in my last post that, " I covered the sensor with a Hard black plastic"'. I meant that I put apiece of hard black plastic on the sensor like a sun visor. I think that has limited the exposure from the sunlight.

HA Man

"Why do the sensors trigger much better on cars and trucks that are on the road, which is further away, than they do for cars and trucks in my driveway, which is closer to the sensors?  My driveway averages about 35' away from the two motion sensors, and the road is at least another 30' beyond my driveway.  I believe even the driveway is beyond the specified range of the sensors anyway, and the road is almost twice as far, so things do not make sense to me".


I think the reason trucks/ cars on the road are able to trigger more easily is because, may be your sensor is at right angle to the road. Sensors react better when motion is across than towards them.

IPS
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Brian H on January 06, 2012, 06:13:36 AM
They do detect better when the motion is across their field horizontally than directly towards them.
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/Optimizing_Motion_Sensor_Detection
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 06, 2012, 01:01:24 PM
Quote
I think the reason trucks/ cars on the road are able to trigger more easily is because, may be your sensor is at right angle to the road. Sensors react better when motion is across than towards them.

IPS

AND

They do detect better when the motion is across their field horizontally than directly towards them.
http://kbase.x10.com/wiki/Optimizing_Motion_Sensor_Detection

Sorry if I wasn't clear about it, but my driveway runs nearly parallel to the road, and across the front (so to speak) of my house.  I have a motion sensor on each corner of the house.  The two motion sensors that are on the front corners are partially exposed to the driveway and to the road.  One reacts a little more to the road traffic than the other one does, but they respond to the traffic about the same overall.

Quote
Are you using the X10 floodlight sensors?  If so, try adjusting the sensitivity ("range") setting, or change the aiming angle (downwards).  If you're using other sensors, see if there is any comparable adjustment(s) that you can tweek.  One extreme option - that probably isn't practical - might be to put up some sort of wall or obstable between your driveway and the road... although others here have claimed that the sensors can "see" around obstacles!  How that works is beyond my understanding, though.

I do not think it would be practical to put up a wall between the road and the driveway, and the zoning people probably would not allow it anyway.

I am using the X10 PR511 sensors.  I have tried adjusting the range control, but I am not sure what it really does.  It does not seem to eliminate the road traffic without eliminating ALL triggers.

By the way, I can not figure out how to have the motion sensors trigger at all times but turn on the floodlights only at night.  They have a photocell in them for dusk/dawn operation but I do not see how to set them so the floodlights will turn on only at night when they are needed, at least not without disabling the motion sensors during the day too.  If there really is no way to set this, it seems to be a glaring omission because it makes them waste all that energy during the day when it the lights are not needed.  Am I missing something?
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on January 06, 2012, 07:53:27 PM
  If there really is no way to set this, it seems to be a glaring omission because it makes them waste all that energy during the day when it the lights are not needed.  Am I missing something?
No, sadly you are not.
Do you have AHP for home automation?
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 07, 2012, 09:20:50 AM
  If there really is no way to set this, it seems to be a glaring omission because it makes them waste all that energy during the day when it the lights are not needed.  Am I missing something?
No, sadly you are not.
Do you have AHP for home automation?

Yes.  But I gave up on it because it seems to be squirrelly.  Is there something in AHP to suppress the floodlights?  I thought the floodlight operation was all local to the PR511s themselves. (?)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Dan Lawrence on January 07, 2012, 03:44:32 PM
  If there really is no way to set this, it seems to be a glaring omission because it makes them waste all that energy during the day when it the lights are not needed.  Am I missing something?
No, sadly you are not.
Do you have AHP for home automation?

Yes.  But I gave up on it because it seems to be squirrelly.  Is there something in AHP to suppress the floodlights?  I thought the floodlight operation was all local to the PR511s themselves. (?)

What version of AHP did you have?   Also, the PRS511 Module in AHP only turns it on or off, it does not support timers. I use a Pro Wall Switch Appliance module in AHP to control the PRS511. 
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Dave on January 07, 2012, 05:20:56 PM
Just put a screw-in photocell controller between the floodlight bulb and it's holder. The power will come on, but the bulb won't be turned on unless it is dark. Or if you're compelled to use X10... use SocketRockets (and a complex series of macros).
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Dan Lawrence on January 08, 2012, 12:07:31 AM
You will need two screw-in photocell controllers as the PR511 uses two bulbs.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 12, 2012, 10:47:59 AM
Just put a screw-in photocell controller between the floodlight bulb and it's holder. The power will come on, but the bulb won't be turned on unless it is dark. Or if you're compelled to use X10... use SocketRockets (and a complex series of macros).

Um... SocketRockets would not be a good idea in the floodlights - for at least three reasons:

1. The physically don't fit the floodlight lampholders (although it may be possible to force-fit certain individual SocketRockets into certain individual lampholders because they "almost" fit).

2. Other information notwithstanding, according to X10's Tech Support, the SocketRockets are not weatherproof - and so they are not suitable for use in the floodlights, unless the floodlights are well-protected from exposure to rain, etc.

3. The SocketRockets do not last when used with bulbs of 100 Watts or more.  You might get away with using them on 75 Watt bulbs, but even so, they woud need plenty of cooling (which probably would not happen if they were installed in a rain-protected situation).

Ask me how I know all this...  (Ahem!)  (Been there, done that! ::) )

I use AHP with my floodlight sensors - although I never had need to use timers with them.

Screw-in photocell controllers would do the job if they are suitable for the installation - although one would be required for each floodlight lampholder.  Another possibility would be to install the wired-in Appliance Modules to control the floodlights in the fixture.  (The floodlights are wired separately from the sensor, so they could be wired to the module instead.  This would control both floodlights with one device, but would require either AHP or the dusk/dawn switches of the sensors to control them for night-only operation).  Unfortunately, either of these options is redundant with the floodlight control relay that is built into the sensor - which makes it a crying shame that the floodlight sensors themselves do not provide the "obvious" capability to turn the floods on ONLY at night. ::)

Disclaimer:  I have not personally tried wiring an In-line Appliance Module to the floodlights as described here, but I have sucessfully wired the floodlights to a manual switch - instead of to the relay in the sensor.  In principle, wiring them to an In-line Module should work OK, too... but when it comes to X10 devices, a lot of things that seemingly should work actually do not.  :'
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: Dan Lawrence on January 12, 2012, 01:38:45 PM
I use a X10 PRO Wall Switch Appliance Module to control a PRS11 Floodlight, that has the timers in it.  I only use the PRS11 in AHP to keep the spotlights on (like on Halloween).
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 17, 2012, 01:26:42 AM
OK, let me see if I have all this straight:  The only options for making the PR511 units turn on their floodlights only at night are:

1.  Set them for dusk/dawn operation (which takes the motion sensors out of the equation, and makes the lights stay on continuously, wasting energy).

2.  Set them for motion-activation, but adjust their Dusk controls so that they activate only at night (rendering the motion sensing outputs inoperative during the day, as well).

3.  Put individual photocell controllers on each floodlight bulb.  (Has anyone actually tried this?  It seems to me the photocell controllers might be fooled by the light from the floods reflecting off of nearby surfaces like the soffits that are right above the floodlights, and might cause the floods to oscillate on and off).

4.  Re-wire the floodlight holders to a separate control feed, instead of using the motion sensors for direct control of the floods.  Use AHP conditional macros triggered from the motion sensor outputs with a nighttime-only condition to activate the floodlights.  (If I read it correctly, I think it was mentioned that there was a way to do this directly with the hardware by using a wired-in X10 module to control the floodlights, but I am not sure I am understanding how to set up the PR511 so that it would make the floods come on only at night.  Is it done by wiring an X10 module between the relay output of the PR511 and the floodlight holders, and setting the X10 module to one of the dusk output codes of the PR511?  In such a scheme, wouldn't the PR511 have to be currently triggered by the motion sensor at the time that it issues the dusk or dawn code?  This sounds very unlikely to to happen.   Or am I misunderstanding the arrangement here?)
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 17, 2012, 01:49:01 AM
In addition to my questions about why my PR511s react to traffic on the road but generally not to the traffic in my nearby driveway, and how to make my PR511s operate in motion-sensing mode 24/7 while having their floods come on only at night, I also have another PR511-related problem that I'm hoping someone can help me figure out:

I find that my PR511s quite often stop reacting to motion for no apparent reason.  This seems especially true at night.  Unfortunately night is when they are most needed.  The situation goes like this:  Many times I may be moving around in and out of the view of the motion sensors.  This causes them to activate, and depending on where I actually move, they quite often will time out when I go out of their view and then turn back on shortly afterwards when I move back into their view.  This is proper operation, and desirable at night when I may need the illumination of the floods, bit it is a bit senseless to turn on the floodlights like this during the day.  The weird thing is that quite often while things are happening like this, there will come a point where the PR511s stop reacting at all, no matter where I move around in their view.  This seems especially likely to happen at night, when I really need the lights to come on.  What is most puzzling about this is why they suddenly go from working regularly to not responding at all, apparently with no change in any ambient conditions that I'm aware of.  And worse, they often will not start responding again until several hours have passed, even if I turn off their feed power for awhile and then turn them back on.  Anyone know why they behave like this?  Do the PR511s overheat or something due to too much activity, and then shut down for awhile?  And is there some sort of work-around to prevent the shutdown?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 17, 2012, 11:16:16 AM
OK, let me see if I have all this straight:  The only options for making the PR511 units turn on their floodlights only at night are: 

...

I think you have it covered.  Some specific comments, though:

Quote
3.  Put individual photocell controllers on each floodlight bulb.  (Has anyone actually tried this?  It seems to me the photocell controllers might be fooled by the light from the floods reflecting off of nearby surfaces like the soffits that are right above the floodlights, and might cause the floods to oscillate on and off).

I agree there may be problems due to reflections that are strong enough to affect the photosensors, with the floodlights being so close.  It probably depends somewhat on the particular photosensor.  Maybe some sort of masking would help.  Overall, my impression is that the whole scheme would be a kludge job at best, though, and likely have a lot of pitfalls.


Quote
4.  ...  (If I read it correctly, I think it was mentioned that there was a way to do this directly with the hardware by using a wired-in X10 module to control the floodlights, but I am not sure I am understanding how to set up the PR511 so that it would make the floods come on only at night.  Is it done by wiring an X10 module between the relay output of the PR511 and the floodlight holders, and setting the X10 module to one of the dusk output codes of the PR511?  In such a scheme, wouldn't the PR511 have to be currently triggered by the motion sensor at the time that it issues the dusk or dawn code?  This sounds very unlikely to to happen.   Or am I misunderstanding the arrangement here?)

Are you referring to my comment about using the dusk/dawn output of the motion sensor unit to control a separately-wired X10 in-line appliance module?  If so, that scheme by itself would not provide the function of motion sensing all the time, with the lights coming on only at night when motion gets sensed.  You would need other hardware to do all of that.  The only way that comes to mind right off would be to wire two X10 in-line appliance modules in series with the floodlights (and separate from the motion sensor).  The first one would be set to trigger from one of the dusk/dawn codes that the motion sensor outputs, and the second would be set to one of the motion sensing codes of the motion sensor unit.  That way, the dusk/dawn-controlled module would  "enable" the floodlight circuit only at night, powering the second ("downstream") in-line module... and only while the circuit was in this powered state, the motion sensing output of the sensor would trigger the second module, turning on the floodlights when the sensor gets activated, and off again when the sensor times out.  The big question with this scheme is whether two in-line appliance modules would even work properly when wired in series this way.  I don't know, but I suspect they would not.

It's too bad that the relay built into the floodlight sensor units could not be used in some scheme, but I don't think it can be set to operate dusk/dawn without also inhibiting the motion sensor outputs - for the same reason as being unable to accomplish this functionality using the settings of the sensor itself.  (I REALLY don't understand why this functinoality was omitted from the floodlight sensors;  it seems like it is such an obvious and needed functinality.  Go figure! ::))
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: MD Corie on January 17, 2012, 11:21:55 AM
....

I find that my PR511s quite often stop reacting to motion for no apparent reason.  This seems especially true at night.  ...  The weird thing is ... there will come a point where the PR511s stop reacting at all, no matter where I move around in their view. ...  Anyone know why they behave like this?  ...  And is there some sort of work-around to prevent the shutdown?

I've seen this behavior, too.  I never could figure out why it happens, though.  I wish I knew.

Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: dave w on January 17, 2012, 11:55:24 AM
4.  Re-wire the floodlight holders to a separate control feed, instead of using the motion sensors for direct control of the floods.  Use AHP conditional macros triggered from the motion sensor outputs with a nighttime-only condition to activate the floodlights.  (If I read it correctly, I think it was mentioned that there was a way to do this directly with the hardware by using a wired-in X10 module to control the floodlights, but I am not sure I am understanding how to set up the PR511 so that it would make the floods come on only at night.  Is it done by wiring an X10 module between the relay output of the PR511 and the floodlight holders, and setting the X10 module to one of the dusk output codes of the PR511?  In such a scheme, wouldn't the PR511 have to be currently triggered by the motion sensor at the time that it issues the dusk or dawn code?  This sounds very unlikely to to happen.   Or am I misunderstanding the arrangement here?)
Besides MD Corie's method of using two wire-in Appliance Modules (yes two modules in series work fine) if you have the CM15A computer interface and AHP software, use a macro triggered by the motion sensor to turn on the lights only in the time window you want. i.e nightime.
Title: Re: Any good tricks for aligning motion sensors to the desired field of view?
Post by: HA Man on January 20, 2012, 01:00:49 AM
Besides MD Corie's method of using two wire-in Appliance Modules (yes two modules in series work fine) if you have the CM15A computer interface and AHP software, use a macro triggered by the motion sensor to turn on the lights only in the time window you want. i.e nightime.

I have AHP, and I am sure that would be the best way to handle it if the sensors themselves cannot do it.  I am just a little gun-shy with AHP because I do not seem to have the handle on it yet.  At least, it does unexpected things that I have not figured out yet.


Getting back to my problem with sensing traffic on the road instead of in my driveway, I moved one PR511 from the corner of the house to a light pole that is BETWEEN the road and my driveway.  I mounted it so that it faces away from the road and towards the driveway and house.  This is not completely desirable because it detects movement close by the house.  On the other hand, at least it does not react to traffic on the road this way.  The strange thing is that it STILL does not detect cars moving in my driveway.  It does detect people walking there, most of the time anyway.  I cannot figure out why it does not detect cars in the driveway no matter which way I mount it, but they will detect traffic in the road about twice as far away as my driveway when they are mounted where they face the road.  It makes no sense to me.  Shouldn't the sensitivity decrease with increased distance?  What gives here?