The Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB) is a world leading provider of product and service certification which involves checking that solutions meet the required standards, and ensuring that companies providing these products and services manage their processes properly.
The LPCB offers approvals to British, European and international standards. Where there is a particular market need or no standards exist, then the LPCB carries out research to develop their own Loss Prevention Standards (LPS).
While researched and developed initially by LPCB experts, Loss Prevention Standards involve input from external experts and independent scrutiny and approval by industry stakeholders (including trade bodies, regulators, insurers, designers, manufacturers and installers).
Every Loss Prevention Standard and LPCB approval scheme is subject to periodic review and, in 2010, it was the turn of LPS 1277 to undergo such a process.
Opinion from various sectors involved in the security industry was sought. The majority of those asked thought an update of the standard was needed, and that this would bring clarity into a complex and rapidly changing market.
First published in 2005, LPS 1277: Requirements for LPCB Approval and Listing of Alarm Transmission Equipment has now been revised to take account of new developments in technology. Given the recent market demand from new entrants, the work was completed earlier this year.
In addition to these new security developments, it also brings in the latest requirements of police, fire authorities and insurers.
Infrastructure of transmission networks
Infrastructure of the transmission networks is progressively changing to provide greater bandwidth for the emerging technologies and services.
Most significant of all is the change from copper wires to optic fibre, in turn making redundant the tried-and-tested alarm signalling technologies employing tone signalling.
Greater use of Ethernet and Broadband can be expected as these bring notable cost savings. Radio and satellite communications, although more costly, bring flexibility and choice.
The generation of new European standards has been slow and, with sight of recent Working Group drafts, one could be forgiven for thinking them overly complicated and unlikely to be understood by all but the technically gifted.
Given that alarm messages pass outside the supervised premises to reach Alarm Receiving Centres (ARCs), it’s reasonable to expect the security level of the alarm transmission system (ATS) to be higher than that of the intruder detection equipment located inside the supervised premises.
However, in recent years the level of security-related performance of installed alarm signalling systems has in fact fallen. The use of signalling equipment commensurate with levels expected of Grade 4 intrusion and hold-up alarm systems has dropped in favour of equipment commensurate with Grade 2 systems.
Historically, a few well-known manufacturers have mostly served the needs of the ‘higher end’ UK alarm signalling market and, as such, specifiers – and insurers in particular – have become accustomed to specifying by brand: a practice that no doubt has slowed the growth of the signalling market, but now this could change.
All-new LPS 1277: the performance-based standard
LPS 1277 is a performance-based standard that will allow specifiers to select products proven to have met a published set of criteria and independently verified as being compliant with that standard.
This removes the uncertainties associated with self-declaration, a process which many are coming to realise is not appropriate for an industry whose primary role is the protection of people and property.
The lack of clear guidance surrounding alarm signalling was reason enough for the LPCB to work with interested parties on producing requirements that truly address the needs of the specifier, the product manufacturer, service provider and the end user.
In April, and after months of industry consultation, LPS 1277 Issue 3.0 was finally published.
The scope of the new standard covers alarm transmission equipment intended for use in fire alarm and/or intrusion and hold-up alarm applications. Reference is made to the mandated requirements of EN 54-21 for the fire alarm and fault routing criteria, as well as the appropriate parts of EN 50136.
The major changes affect equipment designed for use with intrusion and hold-up alarm systems.
The absence of new EN standards has meant that LPS 1277 Issue 3.0 is based upon the current published versions of EN 50136, but includes ‘enhanced’ performance parameters that meet the demands of today’s market.
The UK security industry is committed to working within the framework of EN 50131-1, albeit under the PD 6662 scheme. It was therefore essential that the new enhanced requirements of the LPS were made to fit current practice and without conflict with the EN 50131-1 or PD 6662.
In fact, LPS 1277 now clarifies the ambiguities associated with the notification requirements of EN 50131-1. For example, the performance parameters of the designated secondary transmission path of a dual path ATS must now match those of the designated primary transmission path in all respects except fault reporting time.
Polling of the secondary transmission path
Polling of the secondary transmission path to confirm correct operation may be performed less frequently than the polling associated with the primary path. However, it must step-up to match that of the primary path in the event of a detected fault on the primary path.
That last point ensures the security integrity of both transmission paths is equal while at the same time permitting cost savings.
The LPCB listened to the needs of specifiers and incorporated an additional ATS performance rating, ATS4plus, which provides a fault reporting time of ten minutes, thus bridging the gap between the five hours and three minutes fault reporting time classification options of ATS3 and ATS4 as currently defined in the published EN standards.
When verifying performance, the LPCB insists upon the tests being performed in conjunction with live networks with a minimum of 20,000 consecutive messages being time-stamped and transmitted to an alarm receiver where the signals are analysed in detail to confirm none are missing and that all are received within the transmission times claimed.
This method is not required by the EN standards, yet provides the most meaningful results of ‘real world’ performance.
Experience has shown that sending multiple alarm transmissions across a fully active ‘live’ network yields completely different results than passing one or two messages between a supervised premises transceiver (SPT) and an alarm receiver via a piece of interconnecting cable set up in a laboratory environment.
The response to the loss of transmission paths is assessed by applying differing combinations of faults, thus ensuring the signalling system is compliant under any condition.
Notification of transmission path loss shall appear at the alarm receiver within predefined times. The combinations tested are as follows:
Concept of ‘catastrophic failure’
The loss of both primary and secondary paths is referred to as ‘catastrophic failure’. Such an occurrence may be experienced following, for instance, a power supply fault, and is a requirement peculiar to the LPS.
Upon detection of the loss of the primary path, the requirement allows sufficient time for immediate checks to be made to confirm the loss of the secondary path (ie one minute up to ATS4plus and 30 seconds for ATS 5).
Included within the new requirements is the provision of ‘duplicate’ transmission paths – a normally redundant additional path which uses a different data transfer format/protocol, but the same transmission technology (for example landline or radio), and can take over (ie ‘duplicate’) the functions of either the designated primary or secondary transmission path.
There’s also a section (Annex C) providing guidance on installation practices which manufacturers can reproduce in the product documentation (eg installation and instruction manuals).
It provides clear advice and will help enhance general ATS security/ resilience, avoid undue (false) path failure reports and reduce customer inconvenience.
LPCB approval scheme: the details
The updated LPS 1277 provides the basis of the LPCB approval scheme for alarm transmission equipment. This scheme is entirely voluntary and allows the successful applicant to use the LPCB quality mark and a Red Book listing.
Contrary to some beliefs, LPS 1277 does not compete with European, national or international standards. The EN, BS, IEC and ISO standards are minimum requirements which set the base level in the market.
Manufacturers who are offering products of superior performance need a clear benchmark with which to differentiate their systems: the LPCB approval scheme provides that.
Products listed in the Red Book and on the Red Book website (to be found at www.redbooklive.com) are clearly identified alongside the actual performance parameters measured and confirmed during testing.
With reference to the standard, performance is expressed in terms of parameters – [D], [M], [T] [S], [I] and [A] – and the resultant ATS rating.
Most importantly, a simple statement is included with the Red Book listing declaring for which EN 50131-1 security grade and notification option of intrusion and hold-up alarm system the approved alarm transmission equipment (ATE) is suitable.
Successful testing of products is not the end of the story. In order to be listed in the Red Book and retain their LPCB approval, manufacturers must submit their manufacturing facility and design process to ongoing regular factory production control audits.
The approved product(s) will be audited annually and product development and modifications monitored to ensure continued compliance with the standard.
LPS 1277 requires availability data recorded from all transmission paths be analysed as part of these ongoing checks.
Applying the LPCB quality mark to products
Manufacturers with equipment that has been assessed to have met the requirements of the LPCB approval scheme can apply the internationally recognised LPCB quality mark to their products.
For their part, specifiers can be assured that LPCB approved equipment will have been assessed to rigorous standards and will continue to meet those standards because of the ongoing LPCB conducted factory production control assessments and product auditing.
Installers and Alarm Receiving Centres (ARCs) can be sure that the product they recommend will perform as claimed, and will have good grounds to defend their selections against rivals’ cost-cutting because of the selection of inferior products.
The end user can have confidence in the performance of their system if LPCB approved products have been installed.
One company – namely WebWayOne – has already been approved to LPS 1277 Issue 3.0. Others are either in the process of being assessed or awaiting a slot in the test programme, and all the while clearly demonstrating their support for the LPCB approval scheme.
With system specifiers and insurers expressing a keen interest in LPCB-approved signalling equipment, LPS 1277 is set to play a significant role in shaping the future of alarm signalling.
Martin Aris is director of security systems at the Loss Prevention Certification Board
To download the new LPS 1277 standard and view Red Book listings visit the Red Book website (dedicated links can be found at the foot of this page)
The Loss Prevention Certification Board is a certification brand of BRE Global Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the BRE Group and part of the BRE Trust (a registered charity that uses profits made by the BRE Group to fund research and education programmes designed to enhance and improve the built environment)
