Electronic Locks
Electronic locks for rooms are the most numerous part of any hotel ACS, which is why they ended up in second place on the list of questions, right after cards.
One can, of course, mention possible exceptions to this rule: there are hotel ACS that use wall readers with an electric strike or, for example, electronic cylinders, but this is exotic territory, and discussing it within the scope of this article was not intended.
Just like with cards, hotel-specific requirements for electronic room locks are more than plentiful, and most specialists accustomed to working with office ACS do not immediately pay attention to this. They should, as neglect or ignorance of these specifics can turn into serious consequences.
We will divide the requirements for guest room locks into two groups: mandatory and optional.
The mandatory group includes requirements that must be met by ANY lock that a manufacturer calls “hotel-grade.” All of these requirements are dictated either by hotel business operational workflows or by safety and security regulations. Some functions are implemented via software, while others exist purely at the mechanical level. The failure of any contender in a hotel ACS tender to meet even one of these listed requirements should automatically lead to their disqualification from the participant list.
The “Mandatory” List:
1. Intuitive rules for lock usage.
2. Operation on the “new guest – new key” principle.
3. Automatic locking after exiting the room.
4. Implementation of the “Do Not Disturb” mode and distinct access rules for user categories (guest / maid / security officer) when it is active.
5. Free exit from the inside and “anti-panic” functions.
6. Maximum (complete) autonomy of the lock.
7. Ability to check in guests “without a computer.”
8. Audit trail of openings in the lock’s memory.
Let us present them in more detail.
Unlike an office environment, you cannot brief each new guest on the rules of using the access system. And people checking into a hotel are not just “power users,” but also children or, conversely, elderly individuals. Furthermore, there is a well-known hotel joke: “the average guest is slightly intoxicated and heavily unshaven (or vice versa),” which also points out to us that the rules for opening a room door must be as simple and clear as possible, even “on autopilot.”
“New guest – new key”. This is the law that gave rise to the devices known as “hotel locks.” Its essence boils down to the fact that any guest newly checking into a room must be confident that no other guest who previously stayed in this room can access it again. In the case of a standard mechanical lock, this rule can only be implemented by replacing the key cylinder upon the departure of each guest. Therefore, you cannot be sure that a departing guest did not make a duplicate of the room key at the nearest metal repair shop (which is exactly why massive “fobs” were hung on metal keys in hotels in the past — to prevent the possibility of taking the key outside the hotel).
In an electronic lock, the “new guest – new key” principle must work completely automatically, “without human intervention.” When checking in a guest, the hotel receptionist should not have to think about what additional actions need to be taken to cancel the key of the previously departed guest; the system and the lock must handle this for them. I will note that it has long been standard practice in hotels for guests to take their guest card with them upon check-out (as a souvenir, which additionally features all the hotel’s coordinates and phone numbers), making the “new guest – new key” law even more relevant.
Unlike conventional apartment doors, a room door must always be locked. The guest should not have to insert (present) a key to lock the room — simply closing the door should be enough. In some countries, there are specific requirements stating that after the room door is closed, the lock must remain unlocked for a certain period of time. For example, if a guest steps out into the hallway and the door slams shut, but at that moment they realize that due to a fire it would be much safer inside the room — they must have the opportunity to return without using a card. And although we do not have such requirements in our country yet, it is better if the system provides for enabling such a function programmatically.
However, it must be clearly understood that even in this mode, a hotel employee with the appropriate authority MUST be able to access the room. It is highly desirable that this be an electronic function, rather than a special mechanical key that requires going somewhere to retrieve. After all, a guest might fall ill and simply be unable to open the door from the inside on their own. When multiple guests stay in a room at the same time, it is also desirable to provide the option to allow or forbid the second guest from opening the door in “Do Not Disturb” mode. Because a guest who is “deeply exhausted” from negotiations might fall into a dead sleep after locking up from the inside, and their equally “exhausted” colleague would sooner break the door down than go sort things out at the reception desk.
Free exit from the inside and the “anti-panic” function are very important requirements for a hotel lock, and they must function purely at the mechanical level, regardless of the state of the electronic component of the lock. They are dictated by the desire to preserve the lives and health of guests, for example, during a fire. According to legislation, a hotel is primarily responsible for the lives and health of its guests, and only then for their belongings and valuables! With free exit, I think everything is more or less clear: you press the handle — you exit. Putting exit buttons or readers inside a hotel room is simply unacceptable! (So you will have to say goodbye to the idea of installing a magnetic lock on a room door). The “anti-panic” function is slightly more complex — this is a requirement according to which, even when the lock is locked from the inside with a deadbolt (which is how the “Do Not Disturb” mode is activated in most cases), exiting must still be achieved by a simple (and single) press of the handle. A typical apartment lock, for instance, cannot be opened this way — you must first turn the thumbturn (or key) to retract the deadbolt, and only then can you press the handle. In a hotel, this is not allowed; rather, it SHOULD NOT BE this way in a hotel that cares about the lives of its guests. This rule, as is often the case with fire regulations, is written “in blood” — neglecting it is, at the very least, unwise. Let me remind you, these rules must work at the mechanical level! Even if, due to a fire, the exterior part of the lock along with its electronics has completely melted — the guest must still be able to open the door simply by pressing the lock handle.
The requirement to ensure “hotel lock autonomy” might somewhat confuse safety and security specialists — under our DSTU standards, “autonomous ACS” denotes a fundamentally different type of system operating without computer involvement. Here, “autonomy” refers to the lock’s ability to maintain normal functionality as part of a single system under any state of the central computer, communication lines, or power supply. Even if the lights go out in the entire hotel, the guest MUST still get into their room; after all, they cannot spend the night in the hallway. Based on this requirement, hotel systems began evolving from an electronic lock that runs on standard batteries and uses no trunk (wired) communication channels with the central computer. As I wrote at the very beginning of the first part of the article — “reliability above all.” Keep in mind, however: with modern technology development, the absence of a wired communication channel does not mean at all that an electronic lock on a room door cannot operate in real-time.
Check-in “without a computer” is an extension of the maximum autonomy requirements, but this time taking into account the software properties of the system. In practice, this capability is realized through specialized cards issued in advance — “for a rainy day,” so to speak. Because if your hotel suddenly experiences power issues (or, for example, the server along with the ACS database “breathes its last”), you must ensure not only that currently staying guests can access their rooms, but also that newly arriving guests can be checked in. Furthermore, check-in should not happen via “a maid who will open the room for you with her card,” but thanks to those very backup cards stored in the safe at the reception desk. They must also operate on the “new guest – new key” principle relative to standard guest cards.
An audit trail of openings in the lock’s memory is the easiest requirement for specialists to understand. Without an audit trail, such a lock would have nothing to do with the concept of an “ACS” at all. Although this function appeared not for the sake of strict monitoring, but to ensure the ability to supervise staff and as a tool to combat false accusations of theft from a room. And this is already one of the main components of the hotel’s financial security system, no more, no less. The size of the event archive in the lock’s memory, the technologies for transferring it to the central computer, etc., while important characteristics of each specific system, can be left aside for now when developing the general concept of a hotel ACS.
Having examined this entire list of mandatory functions, one might ask: “If all of them must be fulfilled by any hotel ACS anyway, why list and discuss them with the customer?”. I have repeatedly encountered situations where the customer (or owner) simply does not think about such seemingly obvious things. Therefore, they do not always understand why a standard “apartment” lock should not be installed on a room door and what risks this might entail.
Now let’s move on to the “freestyle program” — that is, to the optional functions that a hotel lock can/should perform.
The capability for emergency unlocking of an electronic lock with a mechanical key. Frankly speaking, I am always perplexed by suppliers who treat this function as almost mandatory. Firstly, any hotel system definitely includes a handheld programmer, one of the functions of which is precisely emergency (but electronic!) lock opening. Secondly, electronic locks were invented precisely to get rid of metal keys. In practice, you will only need this “emergency” key if the electronics have completely failed and even the programmer cannot open the lock. If a supplier aggressively pushes this function, it is worth asking whether everything is fine with the reliability of their systems. Undeniably, in any electronic system, the probability of a lock completely failing cannot be ruled out. But in a normal (meaning reliable) system, the probability of such an event is “once in ten years,” yet you will have to pay for mechanical cylinders upfront, and for the entire hotel at that. And “as a bonus,” you will receive the danger of unauthorized copying and use of these keys, plus the vulnerability to lock picking… Meanwhile, the rare case of a lock failure can be handled by opening it using an “emergency opening” method — such technologies are provided in all systems, allowing the lock to be opened fairly quickly while damaging only a few of its components. Following this, you won’t have to replace the door or the lock — only a couple of its parts. And this will turn out to be significantly cheaper for the hotel than installing mechanical cylinders on all locks at once.
Alarms for the “door left open” state. For offices, this is a standard access point function, but in a hotel, it is more likely to be harmful than helpful. Again, for two reasons:
- a guest might have a habit of taking “air baths,” for which they simply open the window and the door for ventilation. And they are unlikely to be pleased if security guards come to them every time asking: “why is your door open?”;
- in most hotels, the maid must clean the room with the door open, and then the door position signaling will lose all meaning.
Lock operation in online mode (i.e., monitoring its status, receiving audits, etc., in real-time). Over the last couple of years, this function has become the absolute leader of the ratings. And while a few years ago a customer would immediately forget about this desire as soon as they heard the cost of a wired solution, wireless technologies in hotel ACS have now made this function entirely viable in terms of the price/functional ratio. But it’s not all that simple… An online lock is not an end in itself, but merely a means. Therefore, we always ask the customer: “why do you need online?”. Although for us the answer has long been obvious — control of the room inventory is required to prevent “off-the-books” check-ins, as well as staff monitoring to maintain discipline. Effectively, what is needed is a room presence detection system with the most flexible and convenient analytics. And this is exactly where one has to explain to the customer that no online lock can solve these tasks! The logic here is simple: the fact of a lock opening and the fact of entering a room are completely different things. What if a guest opened the door only to drop off their suitcases and left immediately? With a maid, the story is the same. How do you understand that she was in the room for a certain duration, and didn’t just open the door to turn off a light forgotten by the guest?
Exiting the room is even more interesting. Even if the lock is capable of registering and remembering the fact of the lock handle being pressed from the inside (this function, by the way, is one of the most useful among the optional ones), you will hardly be able to understand exactly who pressed the handle (free exit from the room, remember?), and secondly, how do you know whether someone left the room or whether someone was let inside? Online locks can be very useful in specific hotels, for example, in large resort complexes where guests are housed across several buildings scattered over a huge territory, while cards are issued and extended only in the administrative building. In this case, a guest can be reassigned to another room or have their stay extended without the need for a rather long walk to the administrative building.
And if you need up-to-date analytics and room presence control, only a separate presence detection subsystem can handle this, which we will discuss in the next part of the article.
But before concluding this section, I must add a rather large spoonful of tar to that “barrel” of functions we have just discussed.
So far, I have not once mentioned a characteristic of an electronic lock such as design. Since there is no accounting for taste, giving any recommendations on design is completely pointless. Though it is clear that in a hotel, lock design is far more critical than anywhere in an office or at a production site.
In my practice, there have been cases where a conversation regarding system capabilities that had just begun ended with the phrase “I want that pretty lock with the gold handle”… Therefore, it is better to be prepared for such a turn of events and clarify in advance who approves the lock design and how critical it is compared to the system’s functionality.
—
A. V. Katrenko
Commercial Director
“Smart Security” (Russia)
To be continued in the next article…
){kind=link}