Newbie Question: Use of 4-wire Smokes without panel

[George Patton]

And we are under no obligation to assist you in circumventing local codes,

Please specify the precise local codes that I have attempted to
circumvent. Specifics please. Not some generic bullshit about the
sanctity of professional alarm installers.

BTW, the owner of a very small local alarm company told me a few years
ago that I was breaking the law by installing an alarm system in my own
house, and he insisted that I would be subject to arrest by the fire
marshall if I persisted. When I handed him my cell phone and invited
him to call the fire marshall to report me, his eyes grew as big as
proverbial saucers. He said that he was a nice guy and didn't want to
get me into trouble and that he was just hoping that I would do the
right thing by hiring him to handle my installation. At that point I
explained to him that the fire marshall had already sent one of my
associates a letter, along with a copy of the state statutes, which
specifically stated that it was perfectly legal in the state for any
residential property owner to install an alarm system on his own
premises. I explained to the alarm installer that he had himself
violated a state statute -- dealing with malicious prosecution -- by
falsely telling me that I would be subject to arrest by the state fire
marshall. After telling this story to other individuals I learned that
it's commonplace in my area for security salespeople to tell prospective
customers that it's illegal for them to install their own systems. Does
this kind of behavior indicate industry "professionalism"? The fire
and burglary codes are stringent in most states -- not because the
installers have high moral standards -- but because many of them have
such low standards that they have no qualms about defrauding the public
at every opportunity.

regardless of how you disguise it. You came to us for help, not the other way
around.

Why would you and the other pompous twits in this newsgroup assume that
I came to *you* for help. This is just another sign of your arrogance.
I appealed to people like Bass for some TECHNICAL help on a technical
issue. Not *you*. Whenever possible I generally avoid asking twits for
help on any issue, but most particularly on technical issues, for the
simple reason that twits will usually respond to a technical question
with irrelevant nonsense that's intended -- not to enlighten usenet
participants -- but to puff themselves up.

 

[alarman]

George Patton wrote

codes,

Please specify the precise local codes that I have attempted to
circumvent. Specifics please. Not some generic bullshit about the
sanctity of professional alarm installers.

BTW, the owner of a very small local alarm company told me a few years
ago that I was breaking the law by installing an alarm system in my own
house, and he insisted that I would be subject to arrest by the fire
marshall if I persisted. When I handed him my cell phone and invited
him to call the fire marshall to report me, his eyes grew as big as
proverbial saucers. He said that he was a nice guy and didn't want to
get me into trouble and that he was just hoping that I would do the
right thing by hiring him to handle my installation. At that point I
explained to him that the fire marshall had already sent one of my
associates a letter, along with a copy of the state statutes, which
specifically stated that it was perfectly legal in the state for any
residential property owner to install an alarm system on his own
premises. I explained to the alarm installer that he had himself
violated a state statute -- dealing with malicious prosecution -- by
falsely telling me that I would be subject to arrest by the state fire
marshall. After telling this story to other individuals I learned that
it's commonplace in my area for security salespeople to tell prospective
customers that it's illegal for them to install their own systems. Does
this kind of behavior indicate industry "professionalism"? The fire
and burglary codes are stringent in most states -- not because the
installers have high moral standards -- but because many of them have
such low standards that they have no qualms about defrauding the public
at every opportunity.


Why would you and the other pompous twits in this newsgroup assume that
I came to *you* for help. This is just another sign of your arrogance.
I appealed to people like Bass for some TECHNICAL help on a technical
issue. Not *you*. Whenever possible I generally avoid asking twits for
help on any issue, but most particularly on technical issues, for the
simple reason that twits will usually respond to a technical question
with irrelevant nonsense that's intended -- not to enlighten usenet
participants -- but to puff themselves up.

The more you say, the dumber you look. You should quit now.
js

 

[Frank Olson]

Why would you and the other pompous twits in this newsgroup assume that
I came to *you* for help.

Answer: By posting a question in an industry specific open forum you have
invited comments from any professional that participates here (and there are
many).

This is just another sign of your arrogance.
I appealed to people like Bass for some TECHNICAL help on a technical
issue. Not *you*.

If you wanted only "people like Bass" to respond, then you should have said so.
Unfortunately there are very few "people like Bass" (a well known liar and
fraud) in this group. By the way... you should by all means follow his advice
in this instance. The man is a "relay monster" - I mean "master"... )

Whenever possible I generally avoid asking twits for
help on any issue, but most particularly on technical issues, for the
simple reason that twits will usually respond to a technical question
with irrelevant nonsense that's intended -- not to enlighten usenet
participants -- but to puff themselves up.

Uh-huh... so you've asked your question, received a few responses you didn't
particularly care for and now paint *all* professionals with the same "twit
brush"... Sounds like another "Bass Clone", Mike... Sic 'em!!! )

 

[Frank Olson]

... Interestingly,
several of the characters who post here have tried the same lie on DIYers.

And you're not much better. You keep singing the same old song here Robert. I
invite you to post *one* instance where this is true... Just *one*... I'll bet
you can't (unless it's out of context). You post *crap* about the NEC on a
frequent basis and have yet to show me chapter and verse on the termination of
110VAC and low voltage DC in the same box. You've made blanket statements that
this is illegal, then "soft shoe bass-onova'd" your way around the issue (which
I'm sure you will again).

In all fairness, when you post to a USENET newsgroup you are effectively
inviting any and all who read to respond, regardless what their experience
or perspective may be. Furthermore, reading your original post I also got
the impression that you were referring to an installation rather than a test
bench project. Your response to this gentleman's comments isn't fair. If
you had stated at the outset that this was a test bench project I'm sure the
replies would have ben different.

That said, I assume you now have sufficient information to proceed with your
project. I hope it works out for you. Best of luck.

This is one of those times I'm in complete accord with you. It doesn't happen
all that often (a shame really)...

 

[Frank Olson]

Please don't confuse information with moral advice. In spite of the level
of ...

<snip>

The correct term to use here is "Bass Bull Shit" (BBS for short). You seem to
have an unusual fixation with me, Robert (I suppose I should feel flattered).
You also have yet to *prove* I lied about anything. You seem to think (I use
this term "loosely") that you're an authority on a variety of subjects when
you've demonstrated quite clearly that you're not. In fact... when "push comes
to shove", you've proven yourself to be more than "up" for the Asshole of the
Millenium Award. You not only lie about your own "experience" in the trade, you
lie about people you term your "competitors" and anyone else that disagrees with
you. You have absolutely no compunction in taking your peculiar brand of "BBS"
real life. You did so in the alt.rec.aviation group (which you were banned
from) and ASA. I know of no-one else here that resorts to this sort of
behaviour. And before you decide to hit "respond" and spew more BBS about my
going "real life" with "several of your distributors", let me clarify one more
time...

I called three branches of ADI in Florida and asked one simple question: "What
do you need to purchase burglar alarm products from you?". They responded
(unanimously) with: "A Florida License." Your name was never mentioned and
neither was mine. Now... I have absolutely no control over anyone else that
called your distributors and identified themselves as "me", and you yourself
admitted that this was fairly easy to do (in our one and only telephone
conversation). I *did* call DSC to advise them you were providing their control
panel software as a free direct download link on your website (all the necessary
files were actually lodged on your server and openly accessible).

And there-in lies the major difference between us. You go "real life" to spew
lies and nonsense about people to their employers, licensing boards, etc.
where-as I've never lied about anyone. I was also a newbie to Usenet when I
first started posting into the group and at the urging of several individuals
here to "Google" you, I quickly determined you are indeed the "schmuck" Jack
only recently reminded us you are...

We all make "mistakes", Robert and the more honest among us will readily admit
to them. You're all together different. Your attitude and your behaviour isn't
going to change. I think this group brings out the worse in you because you
feel somehow threatened by the people who are *still* legitimately in the trade
and who offer solutions to problems without the hope or expectation of
compensation. You'd like nothing better than to have ASA become your personal
"tech forum" so you can freely hum your DIY Mantra...

 

[George Patton]

If you wanted only "people like Bass" to respond, then you should have said so.
Unfortunately there are very few "people like Bass" (a well known liar and
fraud) in this group. By the way... you should by all means follow his advice
in this instance. The man is a "relay monster" - I mean "master"... )

Interesting comments about Bass. It's possible that Bass may have lied
or misrepresented something in the past -- I wouldn't know --, but it
seems to me that Bass is careful about making claims that he cannot
support. Not so in the case of many so-called "experts" in this
newsgroup. Once again I will invite people who've claimed that I am
violating local codes to cite the specific code. You can't, of course,
because you're merely spewing crap.

BTW, I think I have my problem solved. I'll post the methods in a few days.

Uh-huh... so you've asked your question, received a few responses you didn't
particularly care for and now paint *all* professionals with the same "twit
brush"... Sounds like another "Bass Clone", Mike... Sic 'em!!! )

"Sic 'em"??? You limp dicks couldn't "sic" your own mamas. You're
the sort of morons who would bring a knife to a gunfight.

 

[George Patton]

You may wish to read NFPA72 for starters. I don't want to spend the time
right now wading through my copy to quote all the text. I think you'll find
it very useful to have a copy of the document. It's available in PDF and
print.

Thanks. I've perused this document in the past because I considered
pursuing a few licenses -- not that I have any intention of becoming an
alarm installer -- but because I'm spending more and more time with
projects that are marginally related to automation and licenses could
come in handy from time to time.

...


He's just a lying crook. Glad you showed him the door. Interestingly,
several of the characters who post here have tried the same lie on DIYers.
Fortunately, most people see right through that nonsense.

I suspect some people fall for it. I later learned that this particular
lie is commonplace in alarm sales pitches in my area. I even heard
sales reps from a local wholesale distributor repeating the lie, which
they had heard from installer-customers. I told them that it was BS and
to simply check with the fire marshall's office if they had any doubts.
They checked, and lo and behold, reported back to me that there was
nothing illegal about people installing their own systems in their own
homes.

This kind of oft-repeated lie amazes me because it represents a
marketing effort that exploits customer stupidity. I'm sure you agree
with me that it's much wiser -- business-wise -- to seek out customers
who are reasonably bright than to depend on customers who will believe a
crock of crap. If a sales person does manage to lie successfully to
prospects while making a sale, what happens when they eventually realize
that they've been bamboozled?

It's the same virtually everywhere in the country. Likewise, there are
"professional" installers virtually everywhere who are more than willing to
lie to make a sale.




I doubt you'd be able to charge him with malicious prosecution.

I doubt if the authorities would pursue this, but in a civil court,
where juries are likely to have a few members who've experienced such
sales tactics first hand it's an entirely different proposition. We're
really talking about a kind of fraud here. Unfortunately, most alarm
installers that I've met recent appear to have a total net worth in the
1-5K range which makes them pretty much "judgment-proof".

However, if
he tried to make a time payment deal with you based on fraudulent claims he
might be chargeable under federal truth in lending statutes.




I assume you were not surprised. :^)

Yes I was surprised actually because I had no prior experience with
small alarm companies. I had dealt extensively with a few big companies
who handle banks and large corporate customers in big cities and most of
those people seemed to have high standards of moral integrity. The
smaller security companies that I've been coming across lately remind me
of aluminum siding and gutter salespeople.

...


That's the primary reason for licensing statutes. The electrical codes
exist mostly for life safety.
Agreed.



In all fairness, when you post to a USENET newsgroup you are effectively
inviting any and all who read to respond, regardless what their experience
or perspective may be.

Right, but it's rather pompous for an individual to imply that he
represents an entire group of people, and that perhaps I shouldn't have
posted if I wasn't interested in *his* personal opinion.

Furthermore, reading your original post I also got
the impression that you were referring to an installation rather than a test
bench project.

I was referring to an installation but not a permanent one. I'm
addressing a short term need, and I can assure you that no codes will be
violated. Moreover even the short term installation will be inspected.

 

[George Patton]

And you're not much better. You keep singing the same old song here Robert. I
invite you to post *one* instance where this is true... Just *one*... I'll bet
you can't (unless it's out of context). You post *crap* about the NEC on a
frequent basis and have yet to show me chapter and verse on the termination of
110VAC and low voltage DC in the same box. You've made blanket statements that
this is illegal, then "soft shoe bass-onova'd" your way around the issue (which
I'm sure you will again).

"Legal?" "Not Legal?" No offense (truly), but these terms are
inappropriate for reasons that I will explain.

110VAC and low voltage DC in the same box is acceptable and not
acceptable. It depends on the insulation of the wires, the
separation space, and/or the terminations. The terminations themselves
make all the difference in the world. In either case, I take issue with
your use of the word "legal". The NEC is *NOT* a law but is merely a
set of standards that local communities are free to adopt. In some
jurisdictions in my state there are no local codes and you could use 18
gauge lamp wire to wire your home or business. On the other hand, I
could point you to several jurisdictions where the inspector-gods won't
let you put low-voltage wiring into an AC switch box REGARDLESS of the
circumstances and regardless of the fact that this kind of thing is
condoned by the NEC under specific circumstances.

I'm not sure that anyone in this newsgroup is a liar. On the other
hand, there are plenty of people here who confuse conjectures with facts
and facts with conjectures.

 

[Frank Olson]

Interesting comments about Bass. It's possible that Bass may have lied
or misrepresented something in the past -- I wouldn't know --, but it
seems to me that Bass is careful about making claims that he cannot
support.

Uh-huh... He's real "careful" alright. Have a quick read through this:


http://groups.google.com/groups?q=a...&selm=ILDub.430069$6C4.125757@pd7tw1no&rnum=6

Not so in the case of many so-called "experts" in this
newsgroup. Once again I will invite people who've claimed that I am
violating local codes to cite the specific code. You can't, of course,
because you're merely spewing crap.

I don't think you are violating any "specific code". No professional would hook
up DC powered smokes the way you're wanting to that's all...

BTW, I think I have my problem solved. I'll post the methods in a few days.

Good for you... Hope it all works out.

"Sic 'em"??? You limp dicks couldn't "sic" your own mamas. You're
the sort of morons who would bring a knife to a gunfight.

Uh-huh... and you'd be shootin' blanks... )

 

[Frank Olson]

"Legal?" "Not Legal?" No offense (truly), but these terms are
inappropriate for reasons that I will explain.

Robert's words. You weren't here, so you wouldn't know.

110VAC and low voltage DC in the same box is acceptable and not
acceptable. It depends on the insulation of the wires, the
separation space, and/or the terminations. The terminations themselves
make all the difference in the world. In either case, I take issue with
your use of the word "legal". The NEC is *NOT* a law but is merely a
set of standards that local communities are free to adopt. In some
jurisdictions in my state there are no local codes and you could use 18
gauge lamp wire to wire your home or business. On the other hand, I
could point you to several jurisdictions where the inspector-gods won't
let you put low-voltage wiring into an AC switch box REGARDLESS of the
circumstances and regardless of the fact that this kind of thing is
condoned by the NEC under specific circumstances.

I'm not sure that anyone in this newsgroup is a liar. On the other
hand, there are plenty of people here who confuse conjectures with facts
and facts with conjectures.

)

 

[George Patton]

I don't think you are violating any "specific code". No professional would hook
up DC powered smokes the way you're wanting to that's all...

No professional??? None whatsoever??? How about "HT" in Ohio?
or "AZ" in California? or "BB" in Georgia? Surely these particular
individuals would hook up DC powered smoke detectors the way I want...
once they understood the unique needs of my situation. BTW, I'm using
only the initials of these dedicated professionals to protect their
privacy but since you speak for *all* the professionals in the USA you
must know who they are. Please give them a call on their private
lines if you have any doubts about what they would or would not do
vis-a-vis DC powered smoke detectors.

Enough silliness. It may or may not be true that *none* of the
professionals in your own neighborhood would accept a given job -- given
a particular set of specs -- but since you don't know everyone you're
not really in a position to make universal statements like the one
above. As a matter of fact, if there were a $10000 bet on the table
about the veracity of your claim I could collect your money with one
phone call.

Now here's a good question for you: Was your statement that *no*
professional would do such and such simply an example of unsound
reasoning? Or was it a deliberate misrepresentation (aka a lie)?

 

[George Patton]

Robert's words. You weren't here, so you wouldn't know.

OK. I apologize for the misunderstanding. However, the notion that the
NEC defines "legal" or "not legal" is prevalent among "fundamentalist"
electricians as well as "fundamentalist" alarm installers and it leads
to much grief... typically when an inspector nixes an installation that
falls well within general NEC guidelines. A professional technician has
an obligation to do the best possible work on behalf of his client, but
the ultimate authority about the "legality" of a given installation
usually rests with the inspector and/or code enforcement -- who have an
obligation to the community as well as the property owner. You appear to
have a "black and white" perception of the real world, but the truth of
the matter is that there is a good deal of variety in the real world in
terms of "right" and "wrong", and some types of situations -- such as
low voltage and NM cable in the same box -- are notorious grey areas.

I personally know inspectors who wouldn't hesitate to "ok" a j-box with
cat5 as well as NM cable -- given suitable terminations and suitable
separation between the low voltage and the 110VAC. However I also know
inspectors IN THE SAME CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENTS who would balk at
this kind of thing because of the risk of future complications. So, is
it "legal" to mix NM and low-voltage in the same box? The answer is
"yes" and "no".

When you're arguing with Bass about this kind of thing, I would advise
both of you to see the variations and dispense with the idea that there
is ONE RIGHT WAY and everything else is WRONG. You clearly have such a
perception, Frank, and it leads me to believe that you are
inexperienced vis-a-vis code enforcement. Again, in a limited
context, there may be ONE right way, but given the vast universe of
different situations, the notion of a "one right way" just doesn't make
sense.

 

[Frank Olson]

No professional??? None whatsoever??? How about "HT" in Ohio?
or "AZ" in California? or "BB" in Georgia? Surely these particular
individuals would hook up DC powered smoke detectors the way I want...
once they understood the unique needs of my situation.

I don't see anything "unique" about your "need" that a proper alarm control
panel wouldn't be able to address with a minimal of fuss. As far as I can see
you're complicating things way beyond what they need to be.

BTW, I'm using
only the initials of these dedicated professionals to protect their
privacy but since you speak for *all* the professionals in the USA you
must know who they are. Please give them a call on their private
lines if you have any doubts about what they would or would not do
vis-a-vis DC powered smoke detectors.

Heh... Do any of them have toll-free lines?? )

Enough silliness. It may or may not be true that *none* of the
professionals in your own neighborhood would accept a given job -- given
a particular set of specs -- but since you don't know everyone you're
not really in a position to make universal statements like the one
above.

True. I keep referring to your original post but apparently that no longer
figures into the equation.

As a matter of fact, if there were a $10000 bet on the table
about the veracity of your claim I could collect your money with one
phone call.

I have no doubt...

Now here's a good question for you: Was your statement that *no*
professional would do such and such simply an example of unsound
reasoning? Or was it a deliberate misrepresentation (aka a lie)?

Heh... I should have qualified my statement a little more to say "not *this*
professional". You have to realize that *I* consider DC smoke alarms were meant
to be utilized with an appropriate alarm control panel. I have seen them used
with a fire alarm system as well (only recently), but in conjunction with
supervised system smokes in the hallways and heat detectors in the suites (the
project's also fully sprinklered). The building involved is considered a
"heritage site" having been built before 1910 and employs some rather
exceptional looking architecture. The system (Pyrotronics System III) was
installed in 1985 and we sort of "inherited" the maintenance contract from
another company when they insisted the system had to be upgraded (much the same
story as yours about the alarm contractor).

 

[Frank Olson]

OK. I apologize for the misunderstanding. However, the notion that the
NEC defines "legal" or "not legal" is prevalent among "fundamentalist"
electricians as well as "fundamentalist" alarm installers and it leads
to much grief... typically when an inspector nixes an installation that
falls well within general NEC guidelines. A professional technician has
an obligation to do the best possible work on behalf of his client, but
the ultimate authority about the "legality" of a given installation
usually rests with the inspector and/or code enforcement -- who have an
obligation to the community as well as the property owner. You appear to
have a "black and white" perception of the real world, but the truth of
the matter is that there is a good deal of variety in the real world in
terms of "right" and "wrong", and some types of situations -- such as
low voltage and NM cable in the same box -- are notorious grey areas.

Not in Vancouver or any of the other jurisdictions I work in. I suppose I'm
"blessed"... )

I personally know inspectors who wouldn't hesitate to "ok" a j-box with
cat5 as well as NM cable -- given suitable terminations and suitable
separation between the low voltage and the 110VAC. However I also know
inspectors IN THE SAME CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENTS who would balk at
this kind of thing because of the risk of future complications. So, is
it "legal" to mix NM and low-voltage in the same box? The answer is
"yes" and "no".

When you're arguing with Bass about this kind of thing, I would advise
both of you to see the variations and dispense with the idea that there
is ONE RIGHT WAY and everything else is WRONG. You clearly have such a
perception, Frank, and it leads me to believe that you are
inexperienced vis-a-vis code enforcement. Again, in a limited
context, there may be ONE right way, but given the vast universe of
different situations, the notion of a "one right way" just doesn't make
sense.

On the contrary, I have a lot of experience dealing with code issues and
compliance. In fact, most of the systems I work on terminate both 110 and 220
VAC with 24 VDC in the same enclosure. Fire alarm systems, emergency lighting,
low voltage fan control relays, AC smoke alarms, etc. I have yet to see *any*
AHJ complain as long as the proper precautions are in place and the wiring is
clearly labelled. There is only *one right way* in anything to do with life
safety. All the rest is in the hands of the AHJ you're dealing with. I can
also tell you that in my experience in dealing with jurisdictions like the City
of Vancouver, I've never run into a conflict like you've described. The
decision of the inspector regarding a particular installation is the governing
factor and won't be over-ridden by another in the same department.

You had to have been here to witness Bass at his best the day he argued code and
compliance. The man's hilarious to watch in action... particularly when you
ask him to provide proof... (i.e.. chapter and verse)...

 

[Mark Leuck]

No professional??? None whatsoever??? How about "HT" in Ohio?
or "AZ" in California? or "BB" in Georgia? Surely these particular
individuals would hook up DC powered smoke detectors the way I want...

I called AZ and BB and they said they wouldn't, HT has his phone
disconnected for some reason

once they understood the unique needs of my situation. BTW, I'm using
only the initials of these dedicated professionals to protect their
privacy but since you speak for *all* the professionals in the USA you
must know who they are. Please give them a call on their private
lines if you have any doubts about what they would or would not do
vis-a-vis DC powered smoke detectors.

Enough silliness. It may or may not be true that *none* of the
professionals in your own neighborhood would accept a given job -- given
a particular set of specs -- but since you don't know everyone you're
not really in a position to make universal statements like the one
above. As a matter of fact, if there were a $10000 bet on the table
about the veracity of your claim I could collect your money with one
phone call.

Now here's a good question for you: Was your statement that *no*
professional would do such and such simply an example of unsound
reasoning? Or was it a deliberate misrepresentation (aka a lie)?

No for once Frank is correct, no professional would do such a thing

 

[Frank Olson]

No for once Frank is correct, no professional would do such a thing

For once?? )

George is right too... I don't speak for *all* professionals (not even the ones
listed on my site)...

 

[Frank Olson]

I'm not sure about the "fundamentalist" part. Half these guys are probably
Unitarians. :^)

All kidding aside, the NEC and NFPA72 are standard codes. They have been
adopted in virtually every US state. Enforcement and interpretation of code
is at the discretion of the authority having jurisdiction. Most
knowledgeable AHJ's follow the code. Where these codes have been adopted
they are "the law." That's not a moralistic statement; just a simple fact.
Whether your project is or is not violative is something only you and your
local AHJ (assuming you live in a place where codes are enforced) can
determine.


It all depends upon what the AHJ terms suitable.

This is what's termed the "Bass-onova"... I'll give you a real quick "example".
Enjoy!

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...m=q0QJb.937094%246C4.368353%40pd7tw1no&rnum=4

You'll have to start at the top and read through...

The former "lay minister" lies:

He's also inexperienced at installing alarms. Olson is a counter clerk at a
small distributor in Vancouver, Canada.

Once again... PROVE IT! Where do I work Robert?? You don't know do you?? You
lying sack of shit!!

He has never been an installer.

PROVE IT!!

He has never been licensed.

PROVE IT!!

He has never puilled a permit.

PROVE IT!

He has a habit of
posting outrageous lies in USENET.

Nope... that's you.

Do a Google search on "Olson + 737" and
you'll get an idea what kind of nut-case the guy is. :^)

I'm sure he'll read all about what you know about aviation in the link I posted.
You have yet to post one shred of proof that I've *ever* lied... In fact, you
can't find proof to back your outrageous lies about me, Graham, Tom, Jake, Doug,
or Jim (Alarminex) yet you insist on repeating them like the scumbag you are...
George would be better served by searching on "Robert L. Bass liar fraud". Your
festering history on Usenet spans several Newsgroups over seven years.

 

[alarman]

ML wrote

I called AZ and BB and they said they wouldn't, HT has his phone
disconnected for some reason

I called HT, (I have his Nextel), and he said he changed his number because
GP kept calling him with these nutty project questions. He also said that AZ
and BB were about to do the same thing.

JS

 

[SabodishMike]

Parallel? I wired the + (out) terminal on the first sensor

to the + (in) terminal on the second sensor. In this way,
Detector A would be wired to Detector B which would
be wired to Detector C, etc. Series, no?

That is how a parallel fire alarm circuit is wired. The old style Christmas
lights are what we would call a series circuit. Here's an image in my FAQ
from the fire alarm code book which illustrates the wiring method. BTW,
there's a typo in the attribute. :^)

http://www.bass-home.com/images/faq/HeatDetectorWiring.gif

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
=============================>

 

[Mark Leuck]

ML wrote

I called HT, (I have his Nextel), and he said he changed his number because
GP kept calling him with these nutty project questions. He also said that AZ
and BB were about to do the same thing.

JS

BB just called and said he's no longer in the security industry, kept
getting wierd calls from a general who died in 1945