The efficiency and effectiveness of a protection system will always be a priority, which is why the great reception that perimeter security systems have taken, a segment in which there are great developments that help greatly for this particular.
For the choice of a protection system, many criteria must be taken into account, but these must always be based on efficiency and effectiveness. In the case of a perimeter protection system there are different variables such as the particular conditions of the site to be protected, the technology to be used, the supplier, the quality of the installation and maintenance, among others.
However, in order to give a more precise idea of the above, we invited Manuel Escobar Rodríguez, General Manager of Senstar for the Andean region and Panama, and Hans Dieter Klein Wagner, President of Senstar for Latin America, to help us understand first-hand some factors when evaluating the performance of any perimeter detection sensor.
The first of these, according to our guests, is known as the Probability of Detection (PD) and is defined as the probability of detecting an adversary or intruder in the detection zone covered by the sensor, typically expressed as a percentage (%) of intrusion attempts; Example: 100 attempts and 95 times detected = PD 95%.
It is important to note that the probability of detection is conditional on aspects such as:
Characteristics of the intruder
Speed (Example: 0.025 m/sec - 10.0 m/sec)
Orientation (Example: upright, crawling, rolling)
Size/Mass (Example: minimum 30 kgs.)
Preparation, tools and availability of the intruder (or fugitive)
Adverse effects of climate
Inherent limitations of each sensor technology (Example: video in rainy or foggy conditions)
Sensor Selection and Installation
Sensor appropriate for the purpose, site and its particularities (Example: wall)
Site Topography (Example: Microwave Line of Sight)
The second factor to evaluate the performance of a sensor, according to Senstar representatives, is the rate of unwanted alarms, which involve the FAR (False Alarm Rate) and the NAR (Nuisance Alarm Rate). The FAR are alarms caused by regularly unknown sources or associated with aspects of distortion or failure of the sensor attributable to physical lands, deficiency in connections, among others. The NAR is the rate of invalid alarms that are caused by sources that can be evaluated as "harmless", an example of these are animals, vegetation, climate, among others. They are typically measured as a number of times over a period of time (e.g. 1 time per month). Obviously the level of unwanted alarms of a sensor should be as low as possible.
The third and final evaluation factor that our guests expose is the vulnerability or probability of evasion (you) which define it as the probability that a sensor can be evaded or circumvented either by avoiding it, evading it, manipulating it or by the use of aids and / or tools.
The three factors are very important to evaluate them with the same attention, since a sensor may offer a very high percentage of probability of detection, but at the same time it detects what I do not want it to detect and therefore generates a high rate of unwanted alarms and to worsen the situation it is so visible and vulnerable that evading it is very simple.
Main developments
Moving on to the topic of the technological developments that have been presented in perimeter security systems, our guests note that over time new technologies have been developed and others improved to meet current demands in an increasingly better way.
Here are some examples of what is currently being worked on, according to our guests:
Volumetric buried cable: It is one of the technologies that has presented the best performance taking into account the factors mentioned above because the technology is based on an electromagnetic field that when interrupted by the intruder (It is not necessary to physically step on the cable to be detected) offers a high percentage of probability of detection. On the other hand, the system detects the conductive mass of bodies of more than 35 kilograms so the unwanted alarms are very low and finally being buried is very difficult to evade since the intruder does not know its location.
Point detection systems (on mesh, concertina, wall or integer): That is, detect and monitor more accurately the point of the intrusion (or threat), in order to facilitate the evaluation of the alarm, for example with CCTV/ IP; Perimeter sensors regularly locate the intruder in perimeter sections or perimeter areas that can mean distances of several hundred meters, which makes it difficult to evaluate and respond or react by the response forces.
Multi-Zone detection systems (on mesh, concertina, wall or integer): It is similar to the point mentioned above and let's say includes the latest ideas and considerations on the subject of early perimeter detection. It means that the detection systems will allow to program and design the zones freely according to for example the particular and practical needs of the site, considering the integration with CCTV / IP. In other words, it is not necessarily looking for the detection and location for each meter, but it is about finding the optimal coverage necessary for each section and integrating it with the evaluation cameras.
'Long range' detection systems: It refers primarily to systems that can cover many kilometers (for example >30 kms.) with only one point of feeding and communication. These systems are predestined to protect and detect adversaries that "attack" long and normally known infrastructures, such as pipelines (oil & gas), aqueducts, communication infrastructure, among others.
Other fields of recent developments in the field are for example "ground radars" which for example can be used (preferably) in conditions with wide, flat and obstacle-free terrain.
Another important point is the improvement of video analytical systems, in particular the technologies of "motion detection by video", it is worth mentioning that they are usually considered as sensors for reliable operations of "7/24/365", because we consider that there will always be lapses of time where "a camera can not see", either due to fog or heavy rain, lack of lighting, overgrown/unmaintained vegetation and so on, and, those are the times when a video motion sensor cannot be considered reliable for situations of for example high or maximum security. However, they always serve as a complementary detection system, either according to the degree of security required or with optimal architectural circumstances as the only sensor.
Sectors in which it uses the most
Typical sectors are for example prisons, the power generation sector, from strategic substations, hydroelectric plants, nuclear plants, airports, seaports, the oil & gas sector (Petroleum), military sites, communications and in general all kinds of facilities and infrastructures in outdoor areas that are considered as "strategic" of a country or a company. However, as our guests emphasize, "nowadays also VIP residences or residential complexes are common projects that we attend".
In the same way they emphasize that, depending on the geographical area there are trends and customers let's say typical, for example in North America or in Europe it is relatively common for strategic military sites to have early detection / perimeter detection systems, since the elements of the Armed Forces are primarily trained and engaged in special military issues, not so much for simple surveillance/patrol in perimeters.
Another example can be "perimeter detection in penitentiary centers that regularly, in most countries, is done today with electronic systems, thus 'saving' surveillance/patrol personnel; however, there are still countries that prefer 'manual surveillance' on the perimeters of prisons and build for example (expensive) surveillance towers, unfortunately, sometimes afterwards they do not have enough budgets for all the elements, equipment or tools necessary to do a 'manual surveillance'".
Evolution of the industry
As our guests at Senstar explain, the issue of false alarms or unwanted alarms has improved, but not only because of better and smarter technologies. In fact, in most cases of "false alarms" there were almost always one or more explanations, either related to a bad design or a wrong selection of technology for the particular site, lack of maintenance, errors in the installation, among other factors.
"The correct selection of a technology by professionals and based on a detailed survey of the site, considering the particular environmental conditions is essential to minimize the rate of false alarms and to achieve a successful project," ponder our guests.
In the same way, they conclude that an efficient evaluation, for example with CCTV, is also relevant in relation to that issue of false or unwanted alarms.
Moving on to the theme of which perimeter protection method is most widely implemented in Latin America, Senstar representatives warn that it is difficult to respond, since most sites involve different circumstances and conditions, and all sites must be analyzed for their particular circumstances.
An example of this is experienced in prisons where the volumetric buried cable system "Omnitrax" is preferred because it is very robust and reliable and practically cannot be sabotaged for being covert. But sometimes there may be a penitentiary center that does not have enough space in the "dead man area" and therefore that system cannot be installed since it requires a free / "sterile" space of approximately 3 to 4 meters minimum.
"It could probably be summarized that fence systems (example: vibration, microphone, fiber-optic) are the most used speaking in protected linear meters, since they are quite flexible and regularly less expensive systems."
Regarding the way in which perimeter security systems can be combined with electronic security and/or alarm systems, Manuel Escobar and Hans Dieter Klein warn that perimeter protection is a system that can be part of an integrated electronic security platform through simple mechanisms such as relays in case the systems are not very open until the use of protocols, network controler, drivers, among others.
To close this note, our guests warn about the five most common mistakes a customer makes when requesting an edge security service:
1. Do not consult professionals before buying and installing (... the offices of consultants, architects and project designers do not always know the subject of early detection systems in depth).
2. Failure to select the appropriate technology for the site,
3. Do not contemplate post-installation maintenance and leave the system in abandonment.
4. Do not contract with a recognized, serious and professional company with quality certifications.
5. Do not consider the particular purpose and degree of security required.
