DSC PC3000 & Heat Detectors
Mike Hall
installed and it has worked flawlessly in my home for the last several
years. My system includes the usual contacts, motions, and smoke detectors,
which all function normally.
My question is this. Can I add heat detectors (probably about 3 detectors)
for certain areas of my home and what would be the correct method to connect
these devices to my panel?
My installation manual advises how to hook up the smoke detectors but I am
unsure where to link in the heat detectors. Programming on the zones allows
for a 24 hour bell option, but I don't have the option for 24 hour
bell/fire. My zones are also programmed for Normally Closed loops which
would also be a problem for the Normally Open heat detectors.
Do I just piggy back one wire onto the current fire terminal and then place
the other on a common terminal coming from the heat detectors?
Thanks in advance for your help
Mike Hall
David
with a 1K resistor across the zone (on or past the device not in the
panel)
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:28:34 -0400, "Mike Hall" <ha...@interlynx.net>
wrote:
Frank Olson
normally open. If you have four wire smokes you'll have to find the last
detector in the line where the power supervision relay should be located.
This will have a 1000 ohm resistor installed across it to provide zone and
12vdc power supervision. You can run a two condutor wire for your heat
detectors (18 gauge) from there and simply continue to the next detector in
the circuit. Install the 1000 ohm end-of-line at the last heat detector in
the loop. Alternatively, you can run four conductor from the panel to each
heat detector (18 AWG). Use the second pair as the "return" from each one.
Remove the wires from the fire zone that go out to the smoke detectors and
hook them to the return from the last heat detector. Now connect the wires
to the first heat to the fire zone. Either way you'll have a fully
supervised fire loop.
"Mike Hall" <ha...@interlynx.net> wrote in message
news:kMxib.1098$sf1...@nntp-post.primus.ca...
Jackcsg
with a supervision resistor at the end of line. You can add them in series
to the fire loop of the PC3000, or you can program any zone 24hr bell. Note:
if you use a separate zone for these devices, they will not be indicated by
the "Fire" zone of the control panel, but rather as the zone their attached
too. If you using a monitoring service, the zone can be programmed to send a
fire signal through the digital communicator. They must be wired in series
with an end of line resistor, not parallel onto the fire zone.
Jack
"David" <Da...@user.com> wrote in message
news:17jlovk2sne24qfk1...@4ax.com...
Frank Olson
normally open. Normally open devices have to be wired in parallel, not in
series.
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
news:TjAib.16288$y%2.1...@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
Jackcsg
resistor at the end of the loop.
POS ---------00----------00----------00--------00--------00-------0End of
line resistor
NEG---------00----------00-----------00--------00-------00-------0End of
line resistor
Parallel, run 4 separate wires out to each of the detectors, and place the
resistor....where? Which detector (in Parallel) would you like to supervise?
One...or None? They're wired in series, not parallel.
Alarm 101
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:6tAib.85526$pl3.83350@pd7tw3no...
Jackcsg
which complements the zone with 5 VDC, a short, which causes 0 vdc, places
the control in alarm. An open, anything above 7.5 vdc causes a trouble. In a
parallel connection, the short would still occur, but the zone would only be
supervised up to the point of the resistor. Parallel connects can also be
classified as "T" tapping, which most electricians are famous for. Even
though the device may be "normally open" it is still wired in a series loop,
break the loop, trouble condition, short the loop, alarm. I'm sure Robert
will jump in here to help you out.
Jack
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:6tAib.85526$pl3.83350@pd7tw3no...
Mike Hall
(Zone 16) and then programmed it as 04 ( 0 = slow,audible and 4 = 24 hour
bell) but when I tested it with the heat gun the system did not respond with
an alarm.
Now the heat detector is a normally open contact and when I warm it with the
heat gun it closes completing the circuit. Since I had this wired into zone
16 which would have been programmed as a normally closed loop I was not sure
if it would function properly since I had no way of specifying zone 16 to be
a normally open loop.
Thanks for your help
Mike Hall
"David" <Da...@user.com> wrote in message
news:17jlovk2sne24qfk1...@4ax.com...
Mike Hall
fire terminal on the panel. Starting at the panel the first smoke detector
on the line is located in the basement, then to the first floor, and finally
to the last smoke detector on the 2nd floor of the house. The last smoke
detector has a supervision relay and resistor installed to complete the
circuit. This all functions normally when tested with a magnet on each smoke
detector.
Thanks for your help
Mike Hall
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:pjAib.82767$9l5.50175@pd7tw2no...
Frank Olson
Series connection would look like this:
______/ ____________/ __________
|
EOL
______________________________|
All the switches indicated are "normally closed" (although they're shown
"open" in this diagram).
Parallel connection on "normally open" switches (or heat detectors) would
look like this:
_________________________________
| | | |
\ \ \ EOL
___|____________|__________|_______|
Wires would start at "zone" terminal and "common".
It's best for this individual to wire the heats to the panel's fire zone.
That way it would be easy to distinguish an actual fire alarm from a 24 hour
burg loop (siren's pulsed for fire, steady for burg).
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
news:HbBib.12582$wD.1...@newssvr32.news.prodigy.com...
LJ
wrote:
>I have a DSC PC3000 (board rev R5 and software rev. 7.71 chip) which I
Your PC3000 will have a Fire terminal (always N/O 24 hrs), just to the
right of the Aux in terminal. Hook smokes and temp detectors into that
terminal in PARALLEL - Zone doesn't show on the keypad - Don't forget
a 1K resistor on the last smoke or temp detector. LJ
Marc
if i use dsc's fireloop or i dont seperate each smoke/heat or whatever
normally open device.
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:pGCib.85905$pl3.85388@pd7tw3no...
Frank Olson
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
> The fire loop on the DSC 3000 is supervised by the end of line resistor,
> which complements the zone with 5 VDC, a short, which causes 0 vdc, places
> the control in alarm. An open, anything above 7.5 vdc causes a trouble. In
a
> parallel connection, the short would still occur, but the zone would only
be
> supervised up to the point of the resistor. Parallel connects can also be
> classified as "T" tapping, which most electricians are famous for.
"T" tapping on a fire alarm circuit isn't allowed except for addressible
systems (and even then some manufacturers only allow a certain number on the
loop). No electrician I know would do something like this on a standard
fire circuit and if they did, it certainly wouldn't pass the Verification
Inspection.
> Even
> though the device may be "normally open" it is still wired in a series
loop,
> break the loop, trouble condition, short the loop, alarm. I'm sure Robert
> will jump in here to help you out.
Robert knows the difference between a parallel and series loop. You
obviously do as well but are getting the terminology confused.
Frank Olson
> I did connect the heat detector and resistor to the last zone on the board
> (Zone 16) and then programmed it as 04 ( 0 = slow,audible and 4 = 24 hour
> bell) but when I tested it with the heat gun the system did not respond
with
> an alarm.
>
> Now the heat detector is a normally open contact and when I warm it with
the
> heat gun it closes completing the circuit. Since I had this wired into
zone
> 16 which would have been programmed as a normally closed loop I was not
sure
> if it would function properly since I had no way of specifying zone 16 to
be
> a normally open loop.
You're going to have to select EOL supervision (and not "closed loop") in
programming. This will mean you have to install end-of-line resistors on
*every* intrusion loop. That's why I recommended you use the system's fire
loop to hook the heat detectors up to (that's already set up for EOL
supervision regardless of how you program the rest of the burg loops). It
sounds to me like you've already wired the heats up and possibly home run
the cables to the panel. If you've used four conductor wire, it'll be a
cinch to finish this. Take the "return" from the last heat detector in the
circuit and hook it up to the zone wires going out to the first smoke alarm
(they're presently connected to the fire and common terminals of the system
so you'll have to remove them from there). Now hook the wire going out to
the first heat detector to the fire and common terminals of the system. You
should have supervision through the power supervisory relay in the last
smoke alarm on the loop (panel should be clear of troubles). Applying a
heat gun will trip the heat detector and create an alarm on the fire loop.
Disconnecting a wire from any heat or smoke detector will create a trouble
signal at the keypad.
Jackcsg
normally closed, and one that is normally open. I'm impressed. So what type
of circuit would you call the supervision of that there normally open
circuit? Series, or parallel? The difference is both can be supervised, but
only in series. Short on a normally open circuit causes alarm, open trouble.
Short on a closed loop causes trouble, open alarm. It's a normally open
circuit wired in series, true a parallel short between the two causes an
alarm, that doesn't to me make it a parallel circuit, but I guess if you see
it that way, that's fine. It's usually not good practice to mention the word
parallel to a technician, there's lots of room for mis-interpretation. Wire
your high voltage lights in parallel, keep your smokes in series.
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:pGCib.85905$pl3.85388@pd7tw3no...
Jackcsg
means....agreed
Jack
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:sHDib.86253$pl3.63842@pd7tw3no...
A.J.
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
> They are wired in series Frank, not parallel. In series with the end of
line
> resistor at the end of the loop.
> POS ---------00----------00----------00--------00--------00-------0End of
> line resistor
>
> NEG---------00----------00-----------00--------00-------00-------0End of
> line resistor
>
The above diagram indicates a parallel hook up in a "BUS" configuration.
> Parallel, run 4 separate wires out to each of the detectors, and place the
> resistor....where? Which detector (in Parallel) would you like to
supervise?
> One...or None? They're wired in series, not parallel.
> Alarm 101
The above description indicates a parallel hook up in a "STAR"
configuration.
But either way, they are PARALLEL.
I can see Jacksg is talking about series in a way that the smoke detectors
are installed one after another in a series method, with the eol at the very
end of the loop. But regardless how Jacksg calls it, to everyone else in the
electronics and alarm industries, it is still called a parallel connection.
A.J.
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
> So you have illustrated the difference between a circuit that is wired
> normally closed, and one that is normally open. I'm impressed. So what
type
> of circuit would you call the supervision of that there normally open
> circuit? Series, or parallel? The difference is both can be supervised,
but
> only in series. Short on a normally open circuit causes alarm, open
trouble.
> Short on a closed loop causes trouble, open alarm. It's a normally open
> circuit wired in series, true a parallel short between the two causes an
> alarm, that doesn't to me make it a parallel circuit, but I guess if you
see
> it that way, that's fine. It's usually not good practice to mention the
word
> parallel to a technician, there's lots of room for mis-interpretation.
Wire
> your high voltage lights in parallel, keep your smokes in series.
>
>
You are impressed ? Really ?
The supervision on a N.O. circuit is called a PARALLEL CIRCUIT, and there is
no other name for it in the whole world.
The word "parallel" is used in the sense that the devices are parallel to
the EOL, not the way they are laid out on the run.
The supervision on a N.C. circuit is called a SERIES CIRCUIT, and there is
no other name for it.
The word "series" in used in the sense that the device is in series with the
EOL.
I don't see where there is room for mis-interpretiation anywhere.
Electricians wire high voltage lights in parallel in a STAR configuration.
Same electricians wire heat detectors in parallel in a BUS configuration.
Same electricians wire FACP data bus in parallel in a RING configuration.
Jackcsg
and it's easy to do, I have seen it done several times, by electricians and
alarm companies alike. Take some dipshit you tell to wire smoke detectors in
parallel, he installs 6 smokes in a house, but home runs all detectors,
they're two wire. Has he installed a parallel circuit? You bet your ass.
Where is the supervision? Well dipshit decides to put the eol in the panel,
or I guess he can supervise one detector? This is the shit I talking about.
Is it parallel? you bet your ass it is. Did this guy not understand
parallel, you bet. Carry on...
"A.J." <a...@shaw.com> wrote in message news:MJFib.84481$9l5.8519@pd7tw2no...
Frank Olson
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
> So you have illustrated the difference between a circuit that is wired
> normally closed, and one that is normally open. I'm impressed. So what
type
> of circuit would you call the supervision of that there normally open
> circuit? Series, or parallel?
Parallel.
> The difference is both can be supervised, but
> only in series.
If they're normally closed switches, this would apply. For instance the
normally closed "tamper" on the covers of a NO sprinkler switch would be
wired in series with the EOL, but not so as to interfere with the normal
operation of the actual switch.
NC Tamper
Switch
_________/ __________________
| |
/ EOL
_______________|_____________|
This would be "incorrect" as the panel would never see an alarm if the cover
of the flow switch were removed. In this instance the tamper switch is "in
series" with the flow switch, but both are still supervised by the EOL.
NC Tamper
Switch
____________________/ _______
| |
/ EOL
_____________|_______________|
This would be "correct". The system would identify a trouble for the switch
cover and still put the fire panel into alarm if the actual switch were
operated. In this instance the tamper switch is "in series" with the EOL.
> Short on a normally open circuit causes alarm, open trouble.
Depends on how you program it... As a "burg" zone it would cause alarm with
either a short or an open. Some panels have "day supervisory" as an
option... The action you're describing is typical of a fire alarm zone (or
a zone programmed as "fire").
> Short on a closed loop causes trouble, open alarm.
On a closed loop a "short" would be seen as a "normal" by the panel... An
open would be an alarm. I guess it depends on what you're actually
interpreting "closed loop" to mean. To my way of thinking if you program a
panel to work with "closed loops", it means no EOL supervision. If it's EOL
supervised it could go either way (depending on how you program the zone)
and whether you're using NO or NC contacts...
> It's a normally open
> circuit wired in series, true a parallel short between the two causes an
> alarm, that doesn't to me make it a parallel circuit, but I guess if you
see
> it that way, that's fine.
I think you'll find most people see it the way I've described. Like I said
(and you've agreed), you understand the difference, you're just a little
confused on the terminology.
> It's usually not good practice to mention the word
> parallel to a technician, there's lots of room for mis-interpretation.
Not to any I know or have talked with or even taught...
> Wire
> your high voltage lights in parallel, keep your smokes in series.
Your lights and your smokes should be in parallel... Lights can be "T"
tapped where alarm contacts can't (and remain supervised)...
Frank Olson
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
> OK I get your point. Here's mine. The term parallel can be
mis-interoperated
> and it's easy to do, I have seen it done several times, by electricians
and
> alarm companies alike. Take some dipshit you tell to wire smoke detectors
in
> parallel, he installs 6 smokes in a house, but home runs all detectors,
> they're two wire.
If he used four conductor wire (on your two wire smokes), you can still
"salvage" the situation. If he didn't, you're going to have to use a panel
that will accept two wire smokes on multiple supervised zones. I think
Napco (9600??) has one, and Ademco's "Vista 128" may also work.
> Has he installed a parallel circuit? You bet your ass.
> Where is the supervision? Well dipshit decides to put the eol in the
panel,
> or I guess he can supervise one detector? This is the shit I talking
about.
> Is it parallel? you bet your ass it is. Did this guy not understand
> parallel, you bet. Carry on...
He may have understood "parallel", but he certainly didn't understand the
concept of EOL supervision. Like I said earlier, if he wired up the two
wire smokes using four conductor, you're "home free", but definitely sit
this guy down and explain some things to him...
Marc Mazzarese
4-wire are paralleled with a different configuration.
Marc Mazzarese
ABC Alarm Holdings
Aquisitions
David
normally closed with a measurable 1K resistor in series with the load
. If all these pretty diagrams are not to your liking wire the ROR up
with the resister in series with the load and put an Ohm meter across
the leads going to the panel it should be 1K ohm plus about 100-200
Ohms for the wire used . Put a jumper across each of the terminals of
each ROR and the 1K resistance should disappear , remove and replace
each wire from each terminal and the resistance should go off scale
each time . Once this is done connect the normally closed circuit to
the terminals designed for a normally open supervised loop . The
reason for the convoluted explaination is becaused the normalicy of
the circuit is sometimes explained from the panel and sometimes from
the detection loop. The circuit whether normally open or closed , if
supervised , should always have the EOL resistor visable when in an
unalarmed state. This is the same principle behind a supervised ground
.
fly in the ointment
detectors on a zone would have to trip to cause an alarm. The EOL is wired
in parallel with the last detector.
js
Jackcsg <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
VSS DOUG
you describe there is no difference (to the panel) between an open circuit
(trouble condition) and a tamper or supervisory signal. It used to be fairly
common to see circuits wired as you describe, however NFPA 72 seems to prohibit
it (distinctive signals)and certainly most AHJs I have seen in recent years
want to see a difference in annunciation between an open circuit and a tamper
condition.
Doug L
Frank wrote
Jackcsg
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:h%Gib.84978$9l5.55384@pd7tw2no...
Jackcsg
"Marc Mazzarese" <marc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031013202637...@mb-m06.aol.com...
Mike Hall
getting a little lost in the terminology in how it is related to the heat
detectors.
Series wiring: I was also thinking that as well, all the heats would have
to trigger in order to cause an alarm if they were wired in series. I have
yet to run any of the lines for the heats yet since I wanted to see if my
panel could handle the job.
So since my panel has limited flexibility for putting them on any other zone
except for the fire terminal, would it be possible to put them ahead of my
smoke detectors so that the EOL resistor is still at the end of the loop? I
think that is what Mr. Frank Olson is suggesting I do.
Fire terminal ----- H --- H ---- H --- S --- S --- S ----
| | |
| EOL & 12v power
Gnd terminal -------------------------------------------
Would this be the correct way to wire the heat detectors into the panel?
Thanks for all your help
Mike Hall
"fly in the ointment" <no...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:PEJib.24454$Rd4.10470@fed1read07...
Mike Hall
getting a little lost in the terminology in how it is related to the heat
detectors.
Series wiring: I was also thinking that as well, all the heats would have
to trigger in order to cause an alarm if they were wired in series. I have
yet to run any of the lines for the heats yet since I wanted to see if my
panel could handle the job.
So since my panel has limited flexibility for putting them on any other zone
except for the fire terminal, would it be possible to put them ahead of my
smoke detectors so that the EOL resistor is still at the end of the loop? I
think that is what Mr. Frank Olson is suggesting I do.
Fire terminal ----- H --- H ---- H --- S --- S --- S ----
| | |
| EOL & 12v power
Gnd terminal -------------------------------------------
Would this be the correct way to wire the heat detectors into the panel?
Thanks for all your help
Mike Hall
"fly in the ointment" <no...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:PEJib.24454$Rd4.10470@fed1read07...
Mike Hall
getting a little lost in the terminology in how it is related to the heat
detectors.
Series wiring: I was also thinking that as well, all the heats would have
to trigger in order to cause an alarm if they were wired in series. I have
yet to run any of the lines for the heats yet since I wanted to see if my
panel could handle the job.
So since my panel has limited flexibility for putting them on any other zone
except for the fire terminal, would it be possible to put them ahead of my
smoke detectors so that the EOL resistor is still at the end of the loop? I
think that is what Mr. Frank Olson is suggesting I do.
Fire terminal ----- H --- H ---- H --- S --- S --- S ----
| | |
| EOL & 12v power
Gnd terminal -------------------------------------------
Would this be the correct way to wire the heat detectors into the panel?
Thanks for all your help
Mike Hall
"fly in the ointment" <no...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:PEJib.24454$Rd4.10470@fed1read07...
Mike Hall
getting a little lost in the terminology in how it is related to the heat
detectors.
Series wiring: I was also thinking that as well, all the heats would have
to trigger in order to cause an alarm if they were wired in series. I have
yet to run any of the lines for the heats yet since I wanted to see if my
panel could handle the job.
So since my panel has limited flexibility for putting them on any other zone
except for the fire terminal, would it be possible to put them ahead of my
smoke detectors so that the EOL resistor is still at the end of the loop? I
think that is what Mr. Frank Olson is suggesting I do.
Fire terminal ----- H --- H ---- H --- S --- S --- S ----
| | |
| EOL & 12v power
Gnd terminal -------------------------------------------
Would this be the correct way to wire the heat detectors into the panel?
Thanks for all your help
Mike Hall
"fly in the ointment" <no...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:PEJib.24454$Rd4.10470@fed1read07...
Frank Olson
"VSS DOUG" <vss...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031013231019...@mb-m28.aol.com...
> I could be wrong, but I'm not sure that either way is correct, in the
circuit
> you describe there is no difference (to the panel) between an open circuit
> (trouble condition) and a tamper or supervisory signal. It used to be
fairly
> common to see circuits wired as you describe, however NFPA 72 seems to
prohibit
> it (distinctive signals)and certainly most AHJs I have seen in recent
years
> want to see a difference in annunciation between an open circuit and a
tamper
> condition.
There's a distinct difference (according to our AHJ) between a valve tamper
(someone closing a valve) and removing the cover from a switch. In the
former, the panel has to be manually reset (after the valve is restored to
it's normal position). In the latter, replacing the cover clears the
trouble. The most important thing is to ensure that the alarm is generated
by the panel which is why tamper covers are always wired *after* the flow
switch. I've seen a lot of jobs where the electrician has ignored the
switch covers completely. What's even stranger is the AHJ (in this case
Abbotsford) didn't even require they be connected... Strange...
Frank Olson
"Mike Hall" <ha...@interlynx.net> wrote in message
news:0EKib.2937$ok3...@nntp-post.primus.ca...
> I understand serial and parallel wiring schemes but I think I am also
> getting a little lost in the terminology in how it is related to the heat
> detectors.
>
> Series wiring: I was also thinking that as well, all the heats would have
> to trigger in order to cause an alarm if they were wired in series. I have
> yet to run any of the lines for the heats yet since I wanted to see if my
> panel could handle the job.
>
> So since my panel has limited flexibility for putting them on any other
zone
> except for the fire terminal, would it be possible to put them ahead of my
> smoke detectors so that the EOL resistor is still at the end of the loop?
I
> think that is what Mr. Frank Olson is suggesting I do.
>
> Fire terminal ----- H --- H ---- H --- S --- S --- S ----
> | | |
> | EOL & 12v power
> Gnd terminal -------------------------------------------
>
>
> Would this be the correct way to wire the heat detectors into the panel?
That's exactly right, Mike. Wire them as you've indicated in the diagram...
The Smokes should also be wired using the normally open relay contacts. If
you've done it right you'll see 1000 ohms (plus a bit for the resistance in
the wire) between the first heat detector and the end of line...
Frank Olson
:-P
"Marc Mazzarese" <marc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031013202637...@mb-m06.aol.com...
Frank Olson
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> wrote in message
> That's my point, it's open to interpretation.
No... it ain't... There's only one way to wire a supervised fire circuit.
And that makes sure that *all* devices attached to it are *supervised*!!
Mike Hall
right now since it's 1 am here right now and a few folks in the house would
get upset with me if I did an internal siren test right now! ;-)
Thanks for all your help - you folks sure don't discuss things lightly here.
I am always amazed at the how a simple post can take on a life of its own.
Thank you for your time.
Mike Hall
Ont. Canada
"Frank Olson" <(use the form in my sig line) no-...@invalid.can> wrote in
message news:lXKib.89630$pl3.7719@pd7tw3no...
Robert L. Bass
> how it goes. Can't do it right now since it's 1 am
> here right now and a few folks in the house would
> get upset with me if I did an internal siren test
> right now! ;-)
I have an extensive alarm installation FAQ which you may find somewhat
helpful, Mike. There are a number of pages dedicated to fire alarm wiring,
sensor location, etc. Some of the information comes directly from the fire
and electrical codes. Some was gleaned from some of the manuals I maintain
in PDF format on my web server. Other pages I wrote myself. Those are easy
to recognize by the amateur graphics (not part of my skill set :)).
Feel free to browse and print out anything you may need. The FAQ link is on
my home page (URL in tag line).
Regards,
Robert
=============================>
Bass Home Electronics, Inc
2291 Pine View Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34231
877-722-8900 Sales & Tech Support
941-925-9747 Fax
941-232-0791 Wireless
Nextel Private ID - 161*21755*1
http://www.bass-home.com
=============================>
Mike Hall
I will check it out.
Thanks for your help
Mike
"Robert L. Bass" <rober...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kJOdndXYuar...@giganews.com...
petem
all contact that can creat an alarm are in parallel of each other....
but to supervise the wiring all connection are in serial of each other....
simple... you are both right...
this isnt a simple serial or parallel circuit...
"Jackcsg" <forg...@nospam.goaway> a écrit dans le message de
news:cGGib.12616$ya1...@newssvr32.news.prodigy.com...
fly in the ointment
smokes, it does not latch on alarm.
The ROR function of the heats self restore. Smoke detectors latch, and you
need to reset them by momentarily interrupting the voltage feeding them.
js
Mike Hall <ha...@interlynx.net> wrote in message
news:2hZkb.6960$QX1....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
> Hi Frank
>
> I had a chance to try hooking up the heat detector today so I thought I
> would let you know how it worked.
>
> When I hooked it up the system was ok as far as supervision was concerned.
> When it was tripped (heat gun) the fire alarm sounded (pulsed) but as the
> heat detector cooled the system reset itself and the fire alarm stopped.
In
> other words the relay at the end of the loop failed to latch and maintain
> the alarm the same way it does with the smokes.
snip
Mike Hall
So then there is no need to worry about the fact that the heats do not latch
the fire system since if they are tripped then they will stay tripped until
the heat source is removed.
Thanks for your help
Mike Hall
===========================
"fly in the ointment" <no...@nothanks.com> wrote in message
news:BxZkb.30536$Rd4.10994@fed1read07...
> The eol relay is meant to open the detection loop if power fails to the
> smokes, it does not latch on alarm.
> The ROR function of the heats self restore. Smoke detectors latch, and
you
> need to reset them by momentarily interrupting the voltage feeding them.
> js
>
>
> snip
>
>