Linking two fire alarm panels

[Allen Higginson]

I was not questioning your competancy and apologies for making you think so - the "you're" in this case was general.With that I'll leave the off topic posts alone as slanging matches serve no purpose.
However,the original question was "Is there any way to link two conventional fire alarm panels, both ways, using just 2 core cable run between them?" and somehow it has ended up in addressable territory.I have an inkling that HAES panels can be networked as they have a comms port onboard "but I wouldn't be sure without checking the manual" so at the moment the answer would be no (but maybe!).

[Graeme]

Yes I did read it..... no you didn't say it was a great option but you didn't sat it was either...I'd hate to tracing a fault on one of your systems with a bucket load of spurs off it!!!!!!!

This was a hypothetical solution to a question so I wouldn't go getting thick about it - obviously you woud wire a mini loop out and in to pick up any additional device.
In response to tracing faults on a system with a bucketload of spurs on it, if you're competant then it really shouldn't be an issue.

I not getting thick about it and yes it should be wired in a loop and that was my point but, for someone to come back with a smart assed answer like "hey genius" I think says a lot about them.. and yes I am a "competant" person but to think another person even suggesting the use of spurs off a loop  ( hypothetical solution or otherwise) says a lot about their standard of work!! God only knows what they are teaching other younger and less experienced engineers........ I take from the "if you're competant then it really shouldn't be an issue" statement that you also have engaged in this practice??. standards out the window!!! They are there for a reason.

Irish Fire

you know absolutely nothing about me and i find your comments insulting.I take it you are calling me a cowboy then?
OMG is to me a smart arsed reply.

[IrishFire]

This was a hypothetical solution to a question so I wouldn't go getting thick about it - obviously you woud wire a mini loop out and in to pick up any additional device.
In response to tracing faults on a system with a bucketload of spurs on it, if you're competant then it really shouldn't be an issue.

I not getting thick about it and yes it should be wired in a loop and that was my point but, for someone to come back with a smart assed answer like "hey genius" I think says a lot about them.. and yes I am a "competant" person but to think another person even suggesting the use of spurs off a loop  ( hypothetical solution or otherwise) says a lot about their standard of work!! God only knows what they are teaching other younger and less experienced engineers........ I take from the "if you're competant then it really shouldn't be an issue" statement that you also have engaged in this practice??. standards out the window!!! They are there for a reason.

Irish Fire

you know absolutely nothing about me and i find your comments insulting.I take it you are calling me a cowboy then?
OMG is to me a smart arsed reply.

Well that's the way you consider it, and for that I'm sorry. I am not saying you are a cowboy but, you make a suggestion like that you leave yourself wide open for a comment....... (fair is fair) making suggestions like use a spur off a loop is in any competent and professional persons book "cowboy" style work!!! And regardless of what comment you may come back with you made the suggestion so you have left it open for the opinion that you would partake in this crazy and unprofessional type of work. Just consider the reaction if you said it in a job interview? Would you get the job? I know I would not employ anyone who made a suggestion like that. Now I am sorry if you are insulted by my comments but, you did make the comment in the first place. An old Army Sgt I worked with had a great expression "You stick your head out of the bunker you expect to get shot" And again I say sorry if I have offended you and I don't wish to start a "row" over something stupid like this but a fair comment is a fair comment. Does it not annoy you when you see work like this? I know it drives me up the bloody wall and to be honest I've sacked lads for less (maybe I have obsessive compulsive disorder!! my wife thinks seems so lol) anyway, I think we have gotten off on the wrong foot and I hope this will not affect any future comments made here and again I'm sorry if I have offended you.

[Allen Higginson]

Amen??

[IrishFire]

Amen??

we will see, I hope this is the end

[David Rooney]

Blimey, normally I'd have to visit the local bowling alley or watch an episode of "Tricia" for such entertainment.......!

But broadening the subject slightly, what is wrong with spurs off loops where the system is designed for that purpose. The obvious example being Gent "T" breakers.

If a short circuit isolator is installed either side of a spur I don't see the problem.

A lot of system manufacturers sell their kit blatantly advertising the fact you can "spur" off their loops.....!

[IrishFire]

Blimey, normally I'd have to visit the local bowling alley or watch an episode of "Tricia" for such entertainment.......!

But broadening the subject slightly, what is wrong with spurs off loops where the system is designed for that purpose. The obvious example being Gent "T" breakers.

If a short circuit isolator is installed either side of a spur I don't see the problem.

A lot of system manufacturers sell their kit blatantly advertising the fact you can "spur" off their loops.....!

Is it not the case when you do this that it is no longer a loop? it's as easy to pull in a 4 core as a 2 core. I just hate to see spurs being used.

[Allen Higginson]

Blimey, normally I'd have to visit the local bowling alley or watch an episode of "Tricia" for such entertainment.......!

But broadening the subject slightly, what is wrong with spurs off loops where the system is designed for that purpose. The obvious example being Gent "T" breakers.

If a short circuit isolator is installed either side of a spur I don't see the problem.

A lot of system manufacturers sell their kit blatantly advertising the fact you can "spur" off their loops.....!

Is it not the case when you do this that it is no longer a loop? it's as easy to pull in a 4 core as a 2 core. I just hate to see spurs being used.

But if a 4 core is used and it is damaged then you are in the same position as if you had used a two core (ie - loss of detection on that circuit).
Any chance that this thread can be closed as it has drifted well off the original post?

[IrishFire]

The last word.

Amen.

[ray snell]

After reading this I set my self the challange of linking the panels with a 2 core and think ive managed it (unfortunatly not monitored)
im happy to send jpg of the circuit diagram to anyone that asks but please check it as ive not tested it

[IrishFire]

After reading this I set my self the challange of linking the panels with a 2 core and think ive managed it (unfortunatly not monitored)
im happy to send jpg of the circuit diagram to anyone that asks but please check it as ive not tested it

Please do: cathalvkeogh@eircom.net I'd like to see that, we're all on a learning curve

[monkeh]

you could use your 2 core to link 2 relays together surely?

basically wire a relay at each panel, being hit with 24v on fire condition, and then basically use the 2 core to link the 2  coils.  doubt it would be compliant with any sort of standard, and you'd basicallly be in the situation where  the panels may be unresettable without powering them down, but the 2 core linking the 2 coils would mean that when one panel had a fire, both relays would activate, one at each panel, and you could then use that relay to do whatever you need to do to activate the panel(s)

if you used the relays to hit a class change contact then you wouldn't be faced with the problem of unresettable panels, but it doesn't sound like too safe a set up

[ray snell]

ive now posted the jpeg of my wiring diagram at
 http://www.fileden.com/files/2006/11/4/347602/2%20wire%20panel%20link.jpg
if ive got it right which i think i have you can have as many panels as you like connected on the 2 core they wont lock up and all silence when panel (or panels) that are in fire are silenced

please check out my work and let me know if there is any problem with it (apart from the obvious fact that it isnt monitored)

Ray

[Allen Higginson]

ive now posted the jpeg of my wiring diagram at
 http://www.fileden.com/files/2006/11/4/347602/2%20wire%20panel%20link.jpg
if ive got it right which i think i have you can have as many panels as you like connected on the 2 core they wont lock up and all silence when panel (or panels) that are in fire are silenced

please check out my work and let me know if there is any problem with it (apart from the obvious fact that it isnt monitored)

Ray

It looks like it works ok and it's good that it shows that the CC has activated via the external signal.The only thing is that it won't silence unless the other panel resets  - fire relays (unless configured) don't change state on silence,only on a reset.

[ray snell]

ive now posted the jpeg of my wiring diagram at
 http://www.fileden.com/files/2006/11/4/347602/2%20wire%20panel%20link.jpg
if ive got it right which i think i have you can have as many panels as you like connected on the 2 core they wont lock up and all silence when panel (or panels) that are in fire are silenced

please check out my work and let me know if there is any problem with it (apart from the obvious fact that it isnt monitored)

Ray

It looks like it works ok and it's good that it shows that the CC has activated via the external signal.The only thing is that it won't silence unless the other panel resets  - fire relays (unless configured) don't change state on silence,only on a reset.

sorry your quite right. ive got kentec panels in my head that have 2 sets of fire contacts one of them that duplicates the bells. how about wiring one of the bell circuits via the relay coil (diode suppressed ) instead of using the alarm contacts. would that meet standards?