Proper Daisy Chaining Methods
In Home
back to the board. This seems to me very impractical, though great for the
board manufacturers because I have to buy their zone expanders to make the
system work.
With that said, what is the proper way to group devices together, for
instance two windows in a bedroom. I'm assuming it would be series wiring,
but would I run the wire to the first contact and then run a wire from the
first contact to the second contact. Would the two wire runs meet at or in
the first contact?
What if you did homerun all the wires, can you group them at the panel?
Robert L. Bass
> run homeruns from every contact back to the
> board. This seems to me very impractical,
> though great for the board manufacturers
> because I have to buy their zone expanders
> to make the system work.
It is primarily for your benefit that you run one sensor per zone. By doing
so you make trouble shooting much easier. It also makes the system more
flexible and allows precise reporting of any problems or events.
> With that said, what is the proper way to group
> devices together, for instance two windows in
> a bedroom...
If you really want to group sensors together, try to keep only similar items
on a zone. As in your example, you might place two or three nearby windows
together. You can group delayed doors together. Likewise, you can group
instant doors.
Under almost no circumstances should more than one motion detector or glass
break occupy a single zone. That is simply asking for a service nightmare.
Smoke detectors have latching LED indicators to tell you which one is in an
alarm or trouble state so they can be zoned together.
> I'm assuming it would be series wiring, but
> would I run the wire to the first contact and
> then run a wire from the first contact to the
> second contact...
Even if you elect to group detectors on a zone, you should still home run
each sensor. If you must zone them together, do so at the control panel or
a nearby zone expansion module. That will at least make it possible to find
a problem sensor without having to rip everything out.
> Would the two wire runs meet at or in
> the first contact?
Do not do it that way. See above.
> What if you did homerun all the wires, can you
> group them at the panel?
Yes.
Alarm and Home Automation System FAQ
http://www.bass-home.com/faq/masterfaq/faq.htm
Regards,
Robert
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
941-232-0791 Wireless
Nextel Private ID - 161*21755*1
http://www.bass-home.com
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>
G. Morgan
2004 06:35:04 GMT,
>With that said, what is the proper way to group devices together, for
>instance two windows in a bedroom. I'm assuming it would be series wiring,
>but would I run the wire to the first contact and then run a wire from the
>first contact to the second contact. Would the two wire runs meet at or in
>the first contact?
Homerun to first window - series it, the contact, and the jumper to
the next window - repeat as necessary, put EOL in series with the last
contact.
>
>What if you did homerun all the wires, can you group them at the panel?
Yes, series them all together at the panel. The EOL can go anywhere
in the circuit - but it won't be a *true* EOL that way. And don't go
sticking it out at the farthest point like I think I read, just put it
in the can. I could just imagine trying to find that damn thing
because some genius thought it would be better placed out in Timbuktu.
If you want full supervision and homerun each contact you'll need to
run 4 conductor cable. Or get zone expanders.
-Graham
Warren Stone
While I agree the best approach is to have one sensor per zone,
sometimes there aren't enough zones available to monitor each sensor
individually.
I have a motion sensor in every room, each monitored as a unique zone.
There are multiple glass break sensors wired in series (at the panel)
and monitored as a group. Each glass break has a memory LED to show
which may have tripped. In this manner a glass break would alarm to the
monitoring station, but without corresponding motion could be considered
a false alarm. However glass break with motion sensing indicates a good
chance of real trouble.
Why would you not want more than one glass break or motion sensor on a
single zone?
Robert L. Bass
> sensor per zone, sometimes there aren't enough
> zones available to monitor each sensor
> individually.
With smaller panels that can be a real problem. It's one of the reasons I
like using modular panels like Napco Gemini. You can start with eight zones
and grow the system to 32, 96 or more zones, depending on the model.
> I have a motion sensor in every room, each
> monitored as a unique zone. There are multiple
> glass break sensors wired in series (at the panel)
> and monitored as a group. Each glass break has
> a memory LED to show which may have
> tripped...
As long as you use the latching LEDs on the glass breaks that is an
acceptable substitute for sensor-per-zone ideal. One potential problem is
that G/B detectors sometimes trip due to normal family activity while the
system is disarmed. Be sure to reset any latched LEDs prior to arming so
you can identify the source if a false alarm should occur.
> In this manner a glass break would alarm
> to the monitoring station, but without
> corresponding motion could be considered
> a false alarm...
Are you using logical zone ANDing to accomplish this or does the central
station operator make a decision each time? There are advantages and
disadvantages to each.
> However glass break with motion sensing
> indicates a good chance of real trouble...
Yep.
> Why would you not want more than one glass
> break or motion sensor on a single zone?
I use the technique primarily for trouble shooting purposes. If there's an
event I know immediately which sensor is involved. It also makes the system
more flexible. I can bypass a single sensor if I need to. I can also
configure each sensor differently. For example, a glass break in the garage
can be programmed as a zone follower to avoid false triggers from the noise
and vibration of the garage door operator. There are many situations where
you will benefit from the added flexibility. It's not a hard and fast
rule -- more of an ideal for which to strive.
Warren Stone
Robert L. Bass wrote:
>>While I agree the best approach is to have one
>>sensor per zone, sometimes there aren't enough
>>zones available to monitor each sensor
>>individually.
>
>
> With smaller panels that can be a real problem. It's one of the reasons I
> like using modular panels like Napco Gemini. You can start with eight zones
> and grow the system to 32, 96 or more zones, depending on the model.
My system was originally a 6 zone First Alert FA148. I've added an 8
hzone for the glass break sensors. It will accept another 8 zone board
as well as a few wireless zones. Problem then is with current
requirement. The main board aux output is rated at 600mA only. Higher
than that and it would need an extra 12V supply with battery backup, or
replace all sensors with lower current types or go wireless with
batteries. Hardly worth the effort just yet.
>>I have a motion sensor in every room, each
>>monitored as a unique zone. There are multiple
>>glass break sensors wired in series (at the panel)
>>and monitored as a group. Each glass break has
>>a memory LED to show which may have
>>tripped...
>
>
> As long as you use the latching LEDs on the glass breaks that is an
> acceptable substitute for sensor-per-zone ideal. One potential problem is
> that G/B detectors sometimes trip due to normal family activity while the
> system is disarmed. Be sure to reset any latched LEDs prior to arming so
> you can identify the source if a false alarm should occur.
I'm not certain how to reset the LEDs, but it hasn't been an issue yet.
I suspect it's a simple matter to open the case and pull the jumper.
All sensors are at easy to reach (and see) levels.
>>In this manner a glass break would alarm
>>to the monitoring station, but without
>>corresponding motion could be considered
>>a false alarm...
>
>
> Are you using logical zone ANDing to accomplish this or does the central
> station operator make a decision each time? There are advantages and
> disadvantages to each.
During away, any glass break or motion sense will immediately trigger an
alarm and call the monitoring station. Any subsequent trips will alert
the alarm company again. It will be up to the monitoring station to
make the decision.
>>However glass break with motion sensing
>>indicates a good chance of real trouble...
>
>
> Yep.
>
>
>>Why would you not want more than one glass
>>break or motion sensor on a single zone?
>
>
> I use the technique primarily for trouble shooting purposes. If there's an
> event I know immediately which sensor is involved. It also makes the system
> more flexible. I can bypass a single sensor if I need to. I can also
> configure each sensor differently. For example, a glass break in the garage
> can be programmed as a zone follower to avoid false triggers from the noise
> and vibration of the garage door operator. There are many situations where
> you will benefit from the added flexibility. It's not a hard and fast
> rule -- more of an ideal for which to strive.
I can program the common glass break zones as a follower. The garage
car door is monitored and can take care of this.
Robert L. Bass
> hzone for the glass break sensors. It will accept another 8 zone board
> as well as a few wireless zones. Problem then is with current
> requirement. The main board aux output is rated at 600mA only. Higher
> than that and it would need an extra 12V supply with battery backup, or
> replace all sensors with lower current types or go wireless with
> batteries. Hardly worth the effort just yet.
Whether you need more power depends on the current draw of the components
you have installed. Without looking at the manuals I can't say for sure.
If there's power to spare you may want to get an expander. I don't carry
First Alert but I'm sure one of the other online dealers will assist if you
should decide to do so.
> I'm not certain how to reset the LEDs...
Momentarily remove power from the detectors. You could wire the +12VDC
leads for the glass breaks through a push-button (NC/Momentary Open) switch
inside the master control panel. Just don't hit the button while the panel
is armed or the glass break zone will violate. :^)
> During away, any glass break or motion sense will
> immediately trigger an alarm and call the monitoring
> station. Any subsequent trips will alert the alarm
> company again. It will be up to the monitoring
> station to make the decision.
The advantage to that approach is it's simple and inexpensive. You don't
need a control panel with advanced logic and you don't need to do anything
special. The down side is it requires the operator to make a subjective
decision each time there's an alarm. There is an increased possibility of
erroroneous dispatch or (worse) failure to dispatch on a real emergency.
How much of an increase is anybody's guess. If it never happens the risk is
0%. When and if it does the risk is 100%. Like everything else, you have
to decide what is best for you.
> I can program the common glass break zones as a
> follower. The garage car door is monitored and
> can take care of this.
IMO that would be a wise choice. Best of luck with the system.
greg t. knopf
In Home wrote:
> Alarm board manufacturers keep telling me, run homeruns from every contact
> back to the board. This seems to me very impractical, though great for the
> board manufacturers because I have to buy their zone expanders to make the
> system work.
>
> With that said, what is the proper way to group devices together, for
> instance two windows in a bedroom. I'm assuming it would be series wiring,
> but would I run the wire to the first contact and then run a wire from the
> first contact to the second contact. Would the two wire runs meet at or in
> the first contact?
I believe that you are asking how to physically wire these together. As
I have done it, you would bring your "homerun" run to the first window,
wire in the positive/hot wire -- not the negative/return wire -- then
extend this by running one wire from the negative/return of that first
device to the positive/hot input of the next device. From here continue
using one wire from the negative of the first to the positive of the
next. At the last device, you run a wire from the negative/return back
to connect up where the wire was split before the first device.
I've used this setup for simple door triggers. If the door was opened
the door magnet would trip and the circuit would be made open/broken.
Any of the doors in the series would trip the alarm for all.
Is this what you were asking for?
- greg knopf
gtk...@concentric.net
in...@knopfnet.com
Robert L. Bass
> these together. As I have done it, you would bring
> your "homerun" run to the first window, wire in
> the positive/hot wire -- not the negative/return wire
> -- then extend this by running one wire from the
> negative/return of that first device to the positive/hot
If you elect to do the wiring this way it is extremely important to make all
splices where you can access them later. Otherwise you will be servicing a
large, amoeboid loop with no way to know from where problems come. Remember
old-fashioned Christmas lights? If one light went out the whole loop went
out and you had to test each bulb to find the burned one. The difference
here is that the "bulbs" are recessed in the woodwork, making it extremely
difficult to trouble-shoot.
There is a good reason why manufacturers and competent installers home-run
their cables. It makes it much easier to service the system over the years.
AlarmReview
>This seems to me very impractical,
>though great for the board manufacturers
>because I have to buy their zone
>expanders to make the system work.
As you mentioned, you can daisy chain the devices versus placing each on their
own zone. Besides the reasons given, another advantage to home running wires is
in the even you have a problem on with that wire (break), you can take only the
device out of the run and keep everything else protected. If it was looped,
device to device, throughout the house, you could loose everything down the
line from where the problem (break) occurred.
Rob-