Vince Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 I have a Insteton door deadbolt. I want a program to lock the door after x minutes if the door is unlocked. I tried an "if" statement of "Status - lock off - responding". Not sure of what "responding" means. My then statement is "Insteon- on- lock door". I think my if statement is the problem. Can anyone help?
stusviews Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 It's usually best if you post your program. "Responding" means that the ISY can reach to device. There is no Insteon lock so you must be using the Insteon lock controller with a Morning Industry lock. The Insteon Lock controller does not report the status of the lock, locked or unlocked, so you can't use the status as a program trigger.
Vince Posted February 2, 2017 Author Posted February 2, 2017 The Insteon Lock controller does not report the status of the lock, locked or unlocked, so you can't use the status as a program trigger. Is there something else I can use?
stusviews Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 (edited) Virtually any Z-Wave lock will report status. I prefer Schlage, but Yale and Kwickset have been mention by other posters. Edit: you'll need the Z-Wave module. Edited February 2, 2017 by stusviews
MWareman Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Or you can put a switch in the strike plate to detect locked (hooked to an IOLinc)... Never done it myself, but there are references out there. However, a zwave device is better. Zwave is at least built for security, while Insteon is not. I wouldn't put any lock on Insteon.
sdynak Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 I had a morning industry lock and insteon controller but the setup was unreliable.. I bought a hidden door sensor I was going to drill out a hole to detect if the lock was locked or not by off & on .. If you are happy with your setup consider doing that maybe. As others said though the z-wave reports status and seems pretty reliable. I have a Schlage myself. No complaints overall. Nothing is perfect but it is close.
stusviews Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Drilling a hole behind the striker plate is one of the most dangerous things that you can do. The lock is already the weakest point of entry because material has been removed from the door frame to allow for the striker. That's why people kick at that point to gain entry. Drilling a hole behind the striker plate makes that area even weaker!!!
sdynak Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) I understand but personally not worried.. if someone wants in they will get in and that little hole won't make a difference. I personally dare them honestly. Would be the last thing they kick in my home. Edited February 3, 2017 by sdynak
stusviews Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 I understand but personally not worried.. if someone wants in they will get in and that little hole won't make a difference. I personally dare them honestly. Would be the last thing they kick in my home. Not if no one is home which is the most likely time that doors are kicked in. Thieves don't kick in doors if the place is occupied.
sdynak Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) Actually, they do in my area in the retirement communities during the day.. Let's be honest though.. that little hole in the 2X4 behind the door is not going to make a difference in the grand scheme of things. The actual lock/striker area like you said is already compromised and would not have any bearing where the hole would be drilled. If someone wants in they will get in regardless of this. But I completely understand your thoughts and looking to be cautious. I never went through with the idea but because the setup was not reliable. If I tried to protect every area in my home from a intruder I'd live in a prison. They did this through an unlocked door & was the 2nd in a month in December.. Nothing will stop these idiots. They are drug raving fools and target the elderly. What a shame.. http://patch.com/new-jersey/berkeley-nj/another-home-invasion-one-berkeleys-senior-communities-culprits-still-loose Edited February 3, 2017 by sdynak
sdynak Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) More thoughts.. If you come up with a solution with a switch in the striker plate you can also use a triggerlinc that has terminals inside and can be used for a switch in this case also.. that may be easier than a i/o which needs power and is powerline only. Or mount the triggerlinc on the face of the lock and on deadbolt knob itself a small magnet to operate it in place of the triggerlinc magnet. It may be possible to line it up this way somehow and then no worries with the strikerplate either way. Personally going z-wave is obviously the better solution but if you have to work with what you have then it can be done one way or another. Edited February 3, 2017 by sdynak
Teken Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 As Stu noted placing something inside of the door jamb which removes material from the frame will compromise the integrity and the frame. The reality is, most consumers place true security in the back seat when compared to user convenience. Who ever coined the phrase: *Locks are to keep honest people out - not thieves* If a person took just a few moments to search and Google what that same $200 - 500.XX worth of funds could do in terms of true force protection vs a so called smart lock. They would be embarrassed to find out they could actually find certified products which offer true security. There are countless security products on the open market which offer true force protection security. They are not sexy, they don't require batteries, and they just work. The sad reality is this world (Product Makers) in the last five years have pushed convenience over security where someone will lose their lives. Its pretty comical to read people who literally live in a glass house - yet they believe investing XXX dollars in a smart lock is going to stop a 85 lbs wet child from breaking into your home?!? Security is a lifestyle which is a multi faceted, layered, and practiced approach - Along with keen situational awareness of the things and people around you. People really need to think and evaluate what are their personal risks, dangers, and outside forces at play that will impact them. Having a true security audit to see where you're vulnerable is one of the several first steps in protecting life and property.
sdynak Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Well said Teken.. I won't speak for everyone but I know a smartlock is not going to prevent someone who wants to get into my home from doing so and is not the reason I chose to have one. I lived through Sandy in times when looting in my area where break-ins & theft were at it's peak. There was not much stopping the looters and some homes were just left wide open and missing walls. We had signs at the end of the street warning those seeking to do so and for good reason (their protection). I am not very confident your average homeowner is aware of the options out there for security and to be honest I'm one of them because I know they will break the next device or find a way if they really want to get in. I don't spend a lot of time and $ on barricading others out or myself in. Just not the way I'm going to live. Not ignoring security itself as I have 15 cameras recording 24x7 on the outside and multiple on the inside and every lower door has a open/close sensor. This will not stop anyone but at least I will know immediately should it happen and have a record. And, if I happen to be in bed and you make it to my room you will be faced by not only me but my wife with a barrel staring directly at you. So yes.. there are many facets to security and everyone needs to do what makes them comfortable in their own home. Best, Stan
Teken Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 (edited) My feedback is more about sharing a global view about how consumers need to find balance. There isn't a true right or wrong with respect to security but more about not relying on so much technology that can easily be compromised or used against us. As I get older I truly embrace the KISS principle and those who live by it. I've spent most of my life in the high tech world and have also enjoyed the very same. Why would any of us be here if we didn't enjoy the very same! LOL . . . But people should not get all caught up *Thinking* some random piece of tech is the end all - solve all. There is much to be said of mans best and loyal friend the canine. As you eluded to for those who have the right to bare arms this too offers a different level of protection. In both cases these two elements are reactive and must rely upon someone / something to react. This is why having this single point of view is limiting and dangerous. When a home / business is properly secured in its infrastructure the most important element any single person / company relies upon is *TIME*. Force protection offers that time . . . People often forget or ignore everyday scenarios of people being away for work, play, holiday, etc. Humans need to sleep, drink, eat, etc. Dogs as they get older lose vision, hearing, etc so once again the importance of investing into elements that require just a one time costs and zero maintenance and isn't impacted by time. Lastly, regardless of all the force protection elements in and around the home. One must always keep top of mind is proper comprehensive home owners insurance as you know first hand. Anyone who didn't have extra insurance when Sandy blew threw knows there was nothing going to make you whole. Once again *Insurance* is not sexy, it offers no day to day value to most people. But rest assured when the sh^t hits the fan you will be thankful that a fully comprehensive and enforced policy was there and kicked in when and where it was needed. Edited February 3, 2017 by Teken
elvisimprsntr Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Even the best security is not going to stop them from trying. Just don't make it easy for them and make sure when they do, it leaves signs of forced entry. Otherwise, the cops and your insurance company will claim you left the door open or gave out the keys. Claim denied! Cameras will only help identify them after the crime has been committed, or in your self defense case.
sdynak Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 My feedback is more about sharing a global view about how consumers need to find balance. There isn't a true right or wrong with respect to security but more about not relying on so much technology that can easily be compromised or used against us. As I get older I truly embrace the KISS principle and those who live by it. I've spent most of my life in the high tech world and have also enjoyed the very same. Why would any of us be here if we didn't enjoy the very same! LOL . . . But people should not get all caught up *Thinking* some random piece of tech is the end all - solve all. There is much to be said of mans best and loyal friend the canine. As you eluded to for those who have the right to bare arms this too offers a different level of protection. In both cases these two elements are reactive and must rely upon someone / something to react. This is why having this single point of view is limiting and dangerous. When a home / business is properly secured in its infrastructure the most important element any single person / company relies upon is *TIME*. Force protection offers that time . . . People often forget or ignore everyday scenarios of people being away for work, play, holiday, etc. Humans need to sleep, drink, eat, etc. Dogs as they get older lose vision, hearing, etc so once again the importance of investing into elements that require just a one time costs and zero maintenance and isn't impacted by time. Lastly, regardless of all the force protection elements in and around the home. One must always keep top of mind is proper comprehensive home owners insurance as you know first hand. Anyone who didn't have extra insurance when Sandy blew threw knows there was nothing going to make you whole. Once again *Insurance* is not sexy, it offers no day to day value to most people. But rest assured when the sh^t hits the fan you will be thankful that a fully comprehensive and enforced policy was there and kicked in when and where it was needed. Exactly.. after seeing what happened & still happening to folks that didn't have insurance is depressing. Not only personally but the local home market also. I had just moved in 11 months prior and didn't have a choice to be covered with flood given my mortgage requirements. Many people that had been here for years were not required years ago or just didn't have it because they didn't have to by either it being paid for or not being required. When we were in the market for waterfront property there were some homes being advertised as not requiring flood insurance as it it were a benefit for selling. Any maybe it was then as it is today but good luck being that person that didn't. Since I had a active flood policy I was eligible for a grant to assist in elevating as long as I maintain my flood policy. Why I wouldn't after what I have seen is beyond me so it is not even a question. Plus, it went down by 1/2 since elevating. Back on topic (somewhat).. I do completely agree with your thoughts for security and appreciate all the value in providing the same to everyone. I have very minor levels where I see some with 0 or even worry about it and I don't think I could live now without knowing when a door was opened now.. LOL.. I have 3 dogs and have not mentioned them as I do not consider that a level although it truly is. My team of dogs go nuts over just about anything but again if I'm not here it is meaningless.
Recommended Posts