Backfill ik_rating (IEC 62262 impact / vandal resistance)

[ch-bas]

Standing data-collection issue for ik_rating (from #137). Same empirical/community lane as SoC #122, Frigate-compat #154, and low-light lux (see the lux backfill issue).

The field

ik_rating — IEC 62262 mechanical-impact / vandal-resistance rating (IK00–IK11). It's its own top-level field (not inside ip_rating).

Current coverage

806 of 2,540 cameras (31%) have it. #137 did the initial migration; the rest are uncaptured — mostly vandal domes/turrets whose datasheets state an IK rating.

Quick-win seed (do these first)

~58 cameras already mention "vandal" or "IK" in their features[] but have no ik_rating field — the rating just needs extracting from features/datasheet into the structured field. Examples: abus-ipca62510, abus-ipca62515, abus-ipca68500, abus-ipca72510, abus-ipcb62520, abus-ipcb64520, … (grep cameras/ for features containing "vandal"/"IK" without an ik_rating key).

How to help

• Read the IK rating off the manufacturer datasheet (e.g. "IK10") → set "ik_rating": "IK10".
• Note: entries rated IK10 @ 50 J qualify as IK11 per the 2021 IEC 62262 Amendment 1.
• Leave undefined if not stated — never guess.

Good batch targets: vandal-dome / turret families where the whole series shares an IK rating.

Sibling data-backfill lanes: #122 (SoC), #154 (Frigate autotracking).

[ch-bas]

Tracked on the data-backfill index → #163

[ch-bas]

Progress (dataset v1.53.0): 806 → 845 (32%). The +78 release cameras were checked against their datasheets; only the vandal-rated ones gained an IK value — the rest genuinely have no IK rating (correctly left undefined).