Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Noam]

... 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".

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?

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).

[MD Corie]

... 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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Noam]

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[MD Corie]

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).

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.

...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 ).

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!

[Noam]

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. 

...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.

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.

[MD Corie]

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.

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.

[Noam]

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.

[MD Corie]

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?

[Noam]

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.

[IPS]

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

[MD Corie]

... 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.

... 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.

[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.

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

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.

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.

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!

[HA Man]

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.

[dave w]

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.

[MD Corie]

...
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.