paradox sp5500

[proguard]

While being a long time away from Paradox panels (from the era of
Esprit and Spectra 14XX) now returning trying to understand SP series.
I define zone 12 witch is on zx8 expander as 36 (entry delay 1 (full
arm)/instant) but the panel does not recognize it at all. The panel is
SP5500 v3.8 Any idea why that? Do i have to programm something else
around?
Also where is located the address for enabling panic buttons on the
keypad?
And for last how we can arm in instant stay mode if i can't programm
the entry/exit zones as 36?
(entry delay 1 (full arm)/instant)

Thanks in advance!
Spyros

[tourman]

RHC; Spiros, be very careful to test out all of these new zone
definations to make sure they work after you program them. Even
Paradox tech support is not sure what each of these new ones actually
do and have given us incorrect information on several occasions. For
example, zone category 33 is supposed to be "instant", but it doesn't
work at all, yet category 24 does That part of the manual is a total
screwup - do NOT trust that section of the manual at all.!!

I have no idea why Paradox has overly complicated their panels with
the addition of so many new and incomprehensible zone definitions. I
am going to contact the company and ask that their programming manual
be seriously clarified. It seems in trying to make their panels do
everything for everyone, they've simply seriously confused their
customers.

[proguard]

Thanks for your reply,

you are right, as they told me from the tech department of the local
dealer, in some versions this new definitions do not work and they
need to update the panel...

[Frank Kurz]

I remember Robert used to extoll the virtues of Napco's umpteen
gazillion zone definitions. Perhaps Paradox is trying to catch up! :-)

--
Frank Kurz
www.firetechs.net

[Jim]

On Saturday, April 14, 2012 10:30:36 AM UTC-4, Frank Kurz wrote:
> On 13/04/2012 6:40 AM, tourman wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 10:14 am, proguard

This sounds a little different.
I don't know anything at all about Paradox but it sounds as if they've "preprogramed" various combinations of zone features into a series of double digit numbers. FBI started doing this years ago in their XL series, so you don't have to tick off each feature for each zone.

Napco lets (or makes .... depending upon if you think it's a convenience or not) you choose each feature for each zone. That's one of the features that's part of the convenience (or not) of having the umpteen gazillion definitions and choices. Lot's of people consider this as being too complicated to comprehend or don't want to bother to learn it, and don't use Napco because of it. Most installers now days only have the ability to use the "Alarm panel programing for Dummy's" style of programing. So, in my opinion, I think that if you can't use a laptop to program a panel then you deserve less versatility in your panels.

I don't often use many of the extra Napco features anymore but .... it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

For instance I have a job coming up where they want opening and closing signals but only want one user to have access on certain days and auto arming on certain days. I've got to check it out on how to do this but I'm guessing the 9600 can do it.

If nothing else, it keeps the brain juices flowing.

[tourman]

RHC: Paradox may or may not have their reasons for over complicating
their panels this way; however, they should never put out a manual
that is 1- dead wrong, 2- doesn't explain these new changes, and 3-
not teach their tech support guys what the hell these new zone
definitions mean (I've had wrong advice twice now..). If they want to
save costs of printing, all they have to do is put up a downloadable
PDF on their website, which dealers could keep with them, that
explains each zone definition in detail. DSC does that albeit in their
manual; every other manufacturer does that in some fashion, why
doesn't Paradox. These guys keep rushing their technical changes out
to the field so quickly, we can't keep up. Each version of the panel
is somewhat different, and very little is "backward compatible". God
forbid, is they don't stop this shit, I'm going to have to switch over
to DSC as my standard panel (brrrrr....)

I see no reason to celebrate the unnecessary complication of ANYTHING,
let alone zone definitions that are critical to the proper functioning
of an alarm system. The "Dummies Guide to Whatever" is published to
plow through the complexity of the subject matter at hand - the
intention being to simplify the learning curve. Using a laptop helps
in programming; however, Paradox uses a memory key that does a great
job of assisting in hand programming these complex panels making a
laptop far less convenient.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it......

[mleuck]

On Saturday, April 14, 2012 9:30:36 AM UTC-5, Frank Kurz wrote:
> On 13/04/2012 6:40 AM, tourman wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 10:14 am, proguard

Napco's problem is while they may have configurable zones they only have a few CID/SIA reporting codes making it a pain to deal with from a central station point of view. With Honeywell at least you can add any code you want.

[Jim]

That hasn't created any problems for MY central station, or me. Every so often when I have a gas alarm or other non common device, When putting an account on line I just have to indicate on the set up paper work how I want my central to respond when they get that signal. Having delt with 4/2format for so many years, that's not an effort for me to do and the central is used to it, I guess..... because they say it's no problem. However, in the present generation of programing for Dummys, it's obvious that installers having to think about what they are doing is not part of an installation.

[proguard]

"These guys keep rushing their technical changes out
to the field so quickly, we can't keep up. Each version of the panel
is somewhat different, and very little is "backward compatible".

Robert you are right, even keypads are not compatible with previous
versions. Coming back to where i start it, i only want to make a delay
zone changing into instant the user while in stay mode. The most
common practise in stay mode. Even is doing without any need of
programming directly from the keypad for Honeywell's panels, like
Ademco Vista, Omni and the old FBII XL series and many many other
panels from plenty of manufacturers. I switch to Honeywell panels from
the era of espirt and spectra series and i came back to paradox those
days in order to "watch out" the new SP series with STAYD but untill
now i am little bit dissapointed. Paradox does good panels but they
mesh out the tech with every new versionthey came out...

[mleuck]

That's fine for YOUR central station but with others if the panel cannot send the proper CID/SIA signals it's not accepted.

[Jim]

On Thursday, April 19, 2012 11:53:01 PM UTC-4, mleuck wrote:
> >
> > That hasn't created any problems for MY central station, or me. Every so often when I have a gas alarm or other non common device, When putting an account on line I just have to indicate on the set up paper work how I want my central to respond when they get that signal. Having delt with 4/2format for so many years, that's not an effort for me to do and the central is used to it, I guess..... because they say it's no problem. However, in the present generation of programing for Dummys, it's obvious that installers having to think about what they are doing is not part of an installation.
>
> That's fine for YOUR central station but with others if the panel cannot send the proper CID/SIA signals it's not accepted.

Then maybe your central station should up-grade it's receiver to one that you don't have to wind up every morning. (just kidding)

You mean to say that with all of the electronical thingys available today that there are central stations that only have receivers that wont accept anything but full CID/SIA codes?

What about all the legacy panels out there? My guess is that there are more legacy panels in the field than CID/SIA only panels .... or at least enough of them so that centrals can't/wouldn't just ignore them. I've got a few accounts that send both CID and 4/2 format on the same account number and one account with and old Adcor, sending 3/1

[proguard]

In Greece they are also outhere plenty of stand alone panels with
external communicators from the past using 4X2 format.
Also panels like XL2, Ranger etc... So a receiver cannot ignore the
old pulse formats yet.

[mleuck]

We have tons of 4x2, Modem and whatever accounts, I was referring to panels that can send CID or SIA but can't properly send the event. It's not a big deal to design that into a panel

[Jim]

It's likewise not a big deal to tell the central station what to do when they receive a certain signal. If they can do it for 4/2 format they can do it for CID also.

[proguard]

> It's likewise not a big deal to tell the central station what to do when they receive a certain signal. If they can do it for 4/2 format they can do it for CID also.- Απόκρυψη κειμένου σε παράθεση -
>
> - Εμφάνιση κειμένου σε παράθεση -

They are plenty of new panels in the market that add a new event with
a cid code that the arc has not upload at the cid format. Its easy as
you said for the tech to inform the central station for this new
event. But most of the times the tech guy does not know about this
"unknown" new event (i.e. "log full", "supervision lost" etc) So how
will inform the arc? :-)

[Jim]

I'm not sure that I understand that.
If I understand you right, the Tech guy may not know that the "new" code is in the panel but the central should have standard operation procedures to respond to certain codes even if they haven't been told to respond to them. and the least that they should do is inform the customer or the alarm company that this "new" code has been received.

The situation with Napco panels is:
Rather than having lot's of CID codes pre programed into the Firmware of the panel, Napco just sends the basic essential codes ..... Burg, Fire, Panic,24hour, telephone line and communication fail, opening and closing signals, low battery, AC power loss, restore, trouble, and (I think) gas, CID codes. There are more but I don't remember all of them. Most other manufacturers panels can send in 5o or 100 or more different CID codes and I think some one said that some panels allow you to add your own codes, if they're not part of the original list. So with Napco, in the event that you are monitoring, let's say a water sensor, you have to designate it as a 24hour zone report in the programing and then tell the central station that the signal that they receive on that zone is a water sensor alarm rather than the panel being able to send in the CID code for a water sensor.

As I say, it's not a big deal and doesn't happen that often.

[mleuck]

On Sunday, April 22, 2012 3:18:18 PM UTC-5, Jim wrote:
>
> It's likewise not a big deal to tell the central station what to do when they receive a certain signal. If they can do it for 4/2 format they can do it for CID also.

I think the point of CID and SIA was to avoid doing things like that

[mleuck]

On Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:19:31 PM UTC-5, Jim wrote:

> The situation with Napco panels is:
> Rather than having lot's of CID codes pre programed into the Firmware of the panel, Napco just sends the basic essential codes ..... Burg, Fire, Panic,24hour, telephone line and communication fail, opening and closing signals, low battery, AC power loss, restore, trouble, and (I think) gas, CID codes. There are more but I don't remember all of them. Most other manufacturers panels can send in 5o or 100 or more different CID codes and I think some one said that some panels allow you to add your own codes, if they're not part of the original list. So with Napco, in the event that you are monitoring, let's say a water sensor, you have to designate it as a 24hour zone report in the programing and then tell the central station that the signal that they receive on that zone is a water sensor alarm rather than the panel being able to send in the CID code for a water sensor.

Having to tell a central station that "well this is a water alarm and this one is high temperature" just doesn't cut it when the customer is suing you later because of a botched response.

It can't be all that difficult to put CID/SIA codes into a panel and Napco has a whopping 10 codes available for zone programming which is absurd.

[Jim]

[Jim]

On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 7:25:38 AM UTC-4, mleuck wrote:
>

> Having to tell a central station that "well this is a water alarm and this one is high temperature" just doesn't cut it when the customer is suing you later because of a botched response.
>
> It can't be all that difficult to put CID/SIA codes into a panel and Napco has a whopping 10 codes available for zone programming which is absurd.

I'd dare you to cite a case where someone was sued because of this, but I know that you are just using an unjustifiable, highly unlikely situation to try to defend your unplausable position. I'd also ask you to point out how many people don't use Napco products because they don't have lots of CID codes. It's not all that important .... except maybe to someone like you who doesn't have any (any that would count, that is) field experience and who's central station biased. It may be important to you but it doesn't even appear on the screen for installers.


And again ......... It likewise can't be all that difficult to tell the central station to respond to one zone in a certain way ..... unless of course it's one of the majority of your installers that you so fondly call your customers, who can't use a laptop to program a panel. In that case I can understand why you favor dumbing it down to their level. Obviously, there's no reason to put one of these installers to the task of thinking.

[mleuck]

On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:20:51 AM UTC-5, Jim wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 7:25:38 AM UTC-4, mleuck wrote:
> >
> > Having to tell a central station that "well this is a water alarm and this one is high temperature" just doesn't cut it when the customer is suing you later because of a botched response.
> >
> > It can't be all that difficult to put CID/SIA codes into a panel and Napco has a whopping 10 codes available for zone programming which is absurd.
>
> I'd dare you to cite a case where someone was sued because of this, but I know that you are just using an unjustifiable, highly unlikely situation to try to defend your unplausable position.

Actually I can but not in this forum.

> I'd also ask you to point out how many people don't use Napco products > because they don't have lots of CID codes.

No they don't use Napco because other better alternatives are out there. I doubt most people even have a clue what CID codes do on the central station side. If I recall it wasn't that long ago you claimed you were programming 4/2 and was "looking into" CID and SIA.

> It's not all that important .... except maybe to someone like you who doesn't > have any (any that would count, that is) field experience and who's central
> station biased. It may be important to you but it doesn't even appear on the > screen for installers.

I could be wrong but I don't recall you riding with me when I was installing. Its also amusing how quickly you turn to insults.

> And again ......... It likewise can't be all that difficult to tell the
> central station to respond to one zone in a certain way ..... unless of
> course it's one of the majority of your installers that you so fondly call your customers, who can't use a laptop to program a panel. In that case I can understand why you favor dumbing it down to their level. Obviously, there's no reason to put one of these installers to the task of thinking.

The entire point of CID and SIA is you don't have to tell the central station anything...except apparently if you use Napco. And I don't quite see how adding reporting options is "dumbing" down a panel but then I don't have to use a laptop to program a panel either.

[Jim]

On Apr 25, 9:37 pm, mleuck <m.le...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 11:20:51 AM UTC-5, Jim wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 7:25:38 AM UTC-4, mleuck wrote:
>
> > > Having to tell a central station that "well this is a water alarm and this one is high temperature" just doesn't cut it when the customer is suing you later because of a botched response.
>
> > > It can't be all that difficult to put CID/SIA codes into a panel and Napco has a whopping 10 codes available for zone programming which is absurd.
>
> > I'd dare you to cite a case where someone was sued because of this, but I know that you are just using an unjustifiable, highly unlikely situation to try to defend your unplausable position.
>
> Actually I can but not in this forum.

How typicaly convenient

>
> > I'd also ask you to point out how many people don't use Napco products > because they don't have lots of CID codes.
>
> No they don't use Napco because other better alternatives are out there. I doubt most people even have a clue what CID codes do on the central station side. If I recall it wasn't that long ago you claimed you were programming 4/2 and was "looking into" CID and SIA.

Well you actually got something right. I've been programing alarm
panels longer than you are. So it's no big deal to me to program in
any format. 4/2 format is just as good for me as any other format. The
only advantage to the newer formats is that it makes it easier for
installers and people at the central station to not have to think. I
know, I know, your going to say it's so much faster .... but, in fact
it isn't. Except if you added up all the half seconds saved on a
single zone report at the end of a twenty zones reporting. Not enough
to make a difference. The plausable advantage is that since the people
at central stations aren't the swiftest people in the world, it
prevents them from having to read and interpret zone descriptions sent
in by alarm installers which they fucked up for years when dealing
with 4/2 format. And thus the reason I changed to CID.

>
> > It's not all that important .... except maybe to someone like you who doesn't > have any (any that would count, that is) field experience and who's  central
> > station biased. It may be important to you but it doesn't even appear on the > screen for installers.
>
> I could be wrong but I don't recall you riding with me when I was installing. Its also amusing how quickly you turn to insults.

Gathering from what you've said about your brief stint as and
installer, you would have been riding with me and not for very long.
I've spit people like you out, for years. You know everything you've
ever heard or read. And is easy to turn to insults with you. After
all this time It's simply anticipation that you're going to be the
prick you always are.

>
> > And again ......... It likewise can't be all that difficult to tell the
> > central station to respond to one zone in a certain way ..... unless of
> > course it's one of the majority of your installers that you so fondly call  your customers, who can't use a laptop to program a panel. In that case I can understand why you favor dumbing it down to their level. Obviously, there's no reason to put one of these installers to the task of thinking.
>
> The entire point of CID and SIA is you don't have to tell the central station anything...except >apparently if you use Napco. And I don't quite see how adding reporting options is "dumbing" down a >panel but then I don't have to use a laptop to program a panel either.

Not if you're doing a 4 zone control panel. I wouldn't have to use a
laptop either. I haven't done anything less then 25/30 zones in years.
I suspect that the alarm installers you deal with don't do system with
more zones then they have teeth left in their mouths.

[elecpurch]

replying to proguard , elecpurch wrote:

Hi

I have a Paradox SP5500 running Firmware v2.31. Can you help me out on how to
program zones and zone definitions. I tried a zone but that zone key is lit up
red on my MG10LEDH keypad. I also turned on EOL.


--
posted via
http://forums.cabling-design.com/security-physical/paradox-sp5500-61055-.htm
using Cabling-Design's Web, RSS and Social Media Interface to
alt.security.alarms and other telecom groups