Traditionally, security and building management systems have been regarded as two separate disciplines and have been kept operationally distinct.
However, it is becoming increasingly clear that integrating aspects of these two processes - and access control as well - offers the site owner or operator a much more powerful means of operational control.
Keeping track of the people coming onto a site, when they arrive and when they leave, is not just of interest to the security manager: today, it is of increasing interest to the facilities manager who is trying to ensure that the right services - whether heating, lighting or cooling - are supplied to the people that need them, when and where they need them.
While linking the security and building management systems can be of benefit to the building manager, does it offer anything to the security systems manager? Actually, it does. Rapid changes in the internal building environment, such as a sharp rise in temperature, would register quickly on a building management system - it might be the first indication of a fire. Occupancy-switched lighting would alert the security systems to a person's presence in a particular location. Closer integration offers benefits both ways.
Security, access and building management systems monitor different aspects of overall activity on a site. While they run separately, the synergies cannot easily develop. As an example of what is already possible, we are using building management systems (BMS) as aids to fire control on a number of our contracts. If a fire breaks out, we can use the airconditioning controls to stop or even reverse the fans, reducing the air feeding the fire and helping to bring it under control.
Convergence
The way technology is developing is also making convergence and integration possible. The architecture, for example, of the systems is becoming more alike. Distributed intelligence means that more functionality is actually stored by the control devices that are physically connected to individual items of equipment. These are linked back to the head-end PCs via a local network. Should the network fail, the controllers will still work on a standalone basis until the network links are restored. This adds to 'system security', but also reduces the need for duplicate cabling and redundancy strategies.
Putting all the systems on a single network means they can all be monitored on the same PCs in the control room. As systems have become more 'user-friendly' - and this applies equally to security, access and BMS - so developers have adopted common presentation protocols for the operator. From the user's point of view, the displays on the computer screen will look fairly similar. In addition, the responses required to exception reports and alarms are also clearly outlined: a BMS alert will require confirmation of the fault, possibly an attempt to reset the control and, if that does not work, a call to an external engineer. For the security systems, the steps would be similar with perhaps a visual check on the problem before security staff (either on-site or external) are dispatched to tackle the problem.
That is not to say that everyone has equal access to all parts of all the systems. Password protection of different security levels is standard practice on every type of system today. Levels of admittance to different parts of any system are easy to police and robust enough to make bypassing very difficult.
Health and safety legislation will still, of course, mean that some items - such as fire alarms - have to remain independent, but these are the exception rather than the rule today.
Different priorities?
In the past, the philosophies underpinning security systems and building control differed: security systems were largely about managing risk, while building controls were concerned with maintaining a comfortable working environment. Yet, here again, philosophies are converging.
A security review of a site will grade the risks to the various functions and facilities. So, a large computer room processing credit card transactions, for example, will clearly have a higher risk rating than a storeroom. The BMS and access systems can be used to reduce that risk, though. Keycards or smartcards can log entry and exit. Passive infra red (PIR) presence detectors routed to the BMS for lighting control will also alert control room staff to movement. The BMS environmental controls will help to make sure that the environment stays within acceptable limits and - as mentioned earlier - in the event of a problem like a fire the BMS can also help to contain the problem. So, risk can be reduced by optimising the interface between all three of these systems.
Value for money
It also has to be remembered that fire, security, access and building management systems all come with a price tag. By making the most of the available synergies, not only can overall site management be improved, duplication can be eliminated with a resultant saving on both capital investment and running costs.
Integration has been discussed a great deal over the last decade. A number of factors are now conspiring to make it more achievable, more economic and therefore much more attractive.
For more information contact Neil Cameron, divisional manager, Johnson Controls, 011 438 1600,
© Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd. | All Rights Reserved.
printer friendly version