-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
DACT and telecommunications
- Thread starter ajmcfm
- Start date
steveray
SAWHORSE
I think my FM just accepted something like this under alternative design or something like that....someone will give you a section...
Do not have the book with me
But from at least 2002 edition on it allows various ways to monitor a system some involve only one line, some via computer, dome via wireless
Also a building may have Cooper going out, but may hit fiber optics at some point
This is old;;;
http://docs.docstoc.com/pdf/950628/bc4e2e39-39df-4eaf-902d-592ce467d8fe.pdf
http://www.securityinfowatch.com/root+level/1296254
http://www.nfpa.org/Assets/files/AboutTheCodes/72/72-2010_FAQs.pdf
But from at least 2002 edition on it allows various ways to monitor a system some involve only one line, some via computer, dome via wireless
Also a building may have Cooper going out, but may hit fiber optics at some point
This is old;;;
http://docs.docstoc.com/pdf/950628/bc4e2e39-39df-4eaf-902d-592ce467d8fe.pdf
http://www.securityinfowatch.com/root+level/1296254
http://www.nfpa.org/Assets/files/AboutTheCodes/72/72-2010_FAQs.pdf
TimNY
Platinum Member
Two means of communication.. yes.. Copper.. no. As was explained to us, all the copper goes to fiber at some point.
FM William Burns
Moderator
NFPA 72, 2007
See 8.6.1 and Table A8.6.1
NFPA 72, 2010
See 26.6.1 and Table A26.6.1
See 8.6.1 and Table A8.6.1
NFPA 72, 2010
See 26.6.1 and Table A26.6.1
Last edited by a moderator:
beach
Gold Member
The technology changes faster than NFPA.......
Here is an opinion on the subject of wireless:
Rather lenthty and somewhat tardy - sorry. As promised, here's more information than most of you want to read regarding Wireless Internet Networks and Communications Technologies for transmission of fire alarm signals to a supervising station.
Lets start with the easy stuff. The equipment (per Cecilias attachments) is SFM listed for the purpose. In this case (specifically) the DMP (Digital Monitoring Products) 463G Communicator. It meets the requirements for transmission methods in NFPA 72...in fact ... based on its programming ability, can far exceed the requirements.
Therefore, this is not about equipment approval or meeting a standard. It's about transmission protocol and whether you believe that protocol acceptable or not...(receiving the appropriate signal at the supervising station in the acceptable time).
Unfortunately, we (the fire alarm industry) do not seem to have much input on communications technologies and where they are headed - at least to date. In the "not so long ago days", if I wanted my home (or business) to be monitored by a DACT, it was a piece of cake. A couple of POTS lines (plain old telephone service) connected to the DACT, and I was good to go. Guess what? "Copper Wire" is not available anymore (most of the time). The transmission scheme is conducted in a number of ways ... but typically not via hard copper wires. Even if copper is available, based on the input I've received, it costs about $55.00 per month - per line. The old 24 gauge 4 conductor copper POTS lines are being abandoned by the telecommunications compancies - mainly because of the expanded "services" that can be provided using a different communication (high-speed) method.
Without giving specific advantages / disadvantages to any protocol, here are many of the communications protocols available at this time. Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN). Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM). Internet Protocol (IP) - probably the worst thing you can choose. Wireless Mesh Network (WMN). General Packet Radio Service (GPRS).
Depending on what you require or approve, things can get better; or worse ... and none of these services are "listed" as an acceptable method of transmission for fire alarm signals. They are ALL ... simply communications methods to get signals from Point A (Protected Premises) to Point B (Supervisory Station).
I hope some of you want to learn more about the methods of transmission above to be in a position to make a more intelligent choice of transmission methods. In that - you do have a choice. Detailed information will be provided at the Bay Alarm seminars on Communications Technologies being offered throughout California this year. Visit the website www.bayalarm.com for seminar dates and locations. *Information will be posted by the end of March.
I spent between 30 - 45 minutes on the telephone today with Mr. Greg Basse, President. I threw every senario I could think of at him, and he had (in my opinion) the right answer for every one of them. Shortly put ... My opinion is that you are "green light" using the DMP for transmission of Fire Alarm Signals to a Supervising Station. *It's actually considerably more reliable than DACT methodology,
Here is an opinion on the subject of wireless:
Rather lenthty and somewhat tardy - sorry. As promised, here's more information than most of you want to read regarding Wireless Internet Networks and Communications Technologies for transmission of fire alarm signals to a supervising station.
Lets start with the easy stuff. The equipment (per Cecilias attachments) is SFM listed for the purpose. In this case (specifically) the DMP (Digital Monitoring Products) 463G Communicator. It meets the requirements for transmission methods in NFPA 72...in fact ... based on its programming ability, can far exceed the requirements.
Therefore, this is not about equipment approval or meeting a standard. It's about transmission protocol and whether you believe that protocol acceptable or not...(receiving the appropriate signal at the supervising station in the acceptable time).
Unfortunately, we (the fire alarm industry) do not seem to have much input on communications technologies and where they are headed - at least to date. In the "not so long ago days", if I wanted my home (or business) to be monitored by a DACT, it was a piece of cake. A couple of POTS lines (plain old telephone service) connected to the DACT, and I was good to go. Guess what? "Copper Wire" is not available anymore (most of the time). The transmission scheme is conducted in a number of ways ... but typically not via hard copper wires. Even if copper is available, based on the input I've received, it costs about $55.00 per month - per line. The old 24 gauge 4 conductor copper POTS lines are being abandoned by the telecommunications compancies - mainly because of the expanded "services" that can be provided using a different communication (high-speed) method.
Without giving specific advantages / disadvantages to any protocol, here are many of the communications protocols available at this time. Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN). Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM). Internet Protocol (IP) - probably the worst thing you can choose. Wireless Mesh Network (WMN). General Packet Radio Service (GPRS).
Depending on what you require or approve, things can get better; or worse ... and none of these services are "listed" as an acceptable method of transmission for fire alarm signals. They are ALL ... simply communications methods to get signals from Point A (Protected Premises) to Point B (Supervisory Station).
I hope some of you want to learn more about the methods of transmission above to be in a position to make a more intelligent choice of transmission methods. In that - you do have a choice. Detailed information will be provided at the Bay Alarm seminars on Communications Technologies being offered throughout California this year. Visit the website www.bayalarm.com for seminar dates and locations. *Information will be posted by the end of March.
I spent between 30 - 45 minutes on the telephone today with Mr. Greg Basse, President. I threw every senario I could think of at him, and he had (in my opinion) the right answer for every one of them. Shortly put ... My opinion is that you are "green light" using the DMP for transmission of Fire Alarm Signals to a Supervising Station. *It's actually considerably more reliable than DACT methodology,
FyrBldgGuy
Silver Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 356
The answer today in the latest version of NFPA 72 allows for a variety of options. The changes reflect the realization that the “plain old telephone service” POTS used a variety of methods of transmission. It has copper, fiber, microwave, radio wave, etc. as a means of transmission. DACTS can have many problems associated with connectability, voltage and static.