C-TEC fire alarm compatibility

[oscar21]

Hi, I need to extend a fire alarm, the panel is a CTEC CFP 2 zone one and currently it has a couple of apollo alarm sense sounder bases/heads on it. I fitted 2 extra normal (non-sounder) alarm sense bases and alarm sense heads but the panel is showing a fault on that zone, the fault clears if I bypass the two conventional base's. All the heads work on the sounder bases.

Are the alarm sense conventional bases compatible with the CFP panels because the instructions just show a diode base in the wiring diagrams, if they aren't then why do the alarm sense sounder bases/heads work ok.

Edit - I've just checked the CTEC site and it does say the panels are compatible with the alarm sense stuff. Why would it show a fault then if it clears when you bypass either base, they are definitely wired the correct way round. The bizzare thing is the panel still shows a fault if you put the end of line capacitor in the panel along with the fire alarm circuit if either base is in he circuit it that makes sense.

Edit 2 - I didn't get any instructions with the bases as they were just loose in the package but apparently you don't wire the alarm sense bases across L1 and L2, both browns go in L1. Fancy having an L2 connection then, its just inviting trouble, luckily they are only £3 each.

 

[timhoward]

You are not the first, those bases are horribly confusing.
A normal base:
+ zone to L1 IN , both in and out
- zone to L2, both in and out
DO NOT USE "L1 OUT" FOR ANYTHING, however tempting and logical it seems

A sounder base has two sets of L1 and L2 terminals, and an L1 IN and L1 OUT.
+IN L1 and -IN L2 to one pair
+OUT L1 and - OUT L2 to the other pair.

I used to hate these systems so much....!

The bizzare thing is the panel still shows a fault if you put the end of line capacitor in the panel along with the fire alarm circuit if either base is in he circuit it that makes sense.

That strongly suggests a wiring fault.
To avoid going mad, I'd rig up two short bits of wire with both bases, heads and an EOL and try connecting that directly to the panel zone. If it's happy there, it will be happy when integrated with the existing zone, but obviously remove the EOL.

last one:

 

[Vortigern]

Yeh agree with above. It was fortunate I read the manufacturers instructions and realised this was not the usual or expected type of wiring. Could have been a real pain had I not carefully observed the instructions. Which I had to get on-line.

 

[oscar21]

You are not the first, those bases are horribly confusing.
A normal base:
+ zone to L1 IN , both in and out
- zone to L2, both in and out
DO NOT USE "L1 OUT" FOR ANYTHING, however tempting and logical it seems

A sounder base has two sets of L1 and L2 terminals, and an L1 IN and L1 OUT.
+IN L1 and -IN L2 to one pair
+OUT L1 and - OUT L2 to the other pair.

I used to hate these systems so much....!


That strongly suggests a wiring fault.
To avoid going mad, I'd rig up two short bits of wire with both bases, heads and an EOL and try connecting that directly to the panel zone. If it's happy there, it will be happy when integrated with the existing zone, but obviously remove the EOL.

View attachment 107792

last one:
View attachment 107793

Yea, it crazy, I'm no expert on fire alarm panels by any means but I know sounder bases and beacons are sometimes wired differently on various make panels but I thought a base was a base, you either split the -ve or the +ve wires depending on the make across the diode. They have obviously just used the older conventional base and updated it by screwing newr stuff to it leaving the older terminal identifiers in place, I did read the instructions for the sounder base so understood not to connect anything to the L1, L2 etc but unfortunately I didnt have any instructions for the normal bases but I thought how hard can it be.

Also the sounder and beacon bases are pain in the arse to fit, the screws are hidden way too deep in the mechanism to even see what you are doing.

 

[peteronowak]

I have question about CTEK 2 zone fire alarm panel, hope its ok to jump in on this thread....

I have a situation where all my cables (2core fire resistant) all run individually from each detector (7 of them) and from each call point (2 of them) all the way to a central point where a panel will be installed. So the cable monkey, did not connect the detectors and call points in series, instead wasted quite a lot of cable and ran it all the way from each detector/call point to one central point.

This means that I can no longer achieve a serial connection, instead I can connect it all in parallell and possibly put EOL at the end of each device.

My question is now if a CTEK 2 zone panel (CFP702-2) can still be used for connecting this up?

The premises is quite small, 5 rooms and a staircase, as such I was planning on using a CTEK 2 zone panel (CFP702-2) and make the staircase 1 zone (2 detectors and a call point) and the 5 rooms into the other zone (5 detectors and a call point)

Each zone also has cabling for a sounder

As the cable monkey pulled all the cables through (point to point) I suppose I could effectively create 7 seperate zones and put EOL at each end point but as mentioned, ideally I would like to simply get a CTEK 2 zone panel (CFP702-2) as the premesis is less than 50m2 but would a CTEK 2 zone panel accept this? Looking at the manual, the CTEK 2 zone panel (CFP702-2) want it all to be connected in a series and not in parallell.

Many thanks in advance for any help.

 

[Flanders]

You have to wire them in series. With the set up you have with 7 detectors and 2 call points so would need 9 zones . The sounders also go on separate circuits

 

[peteronowak]

You have to wire them in series. With the set up you have with 7 detectors and 2 call points so would need 9 zones . The sounders also go on separate circuits

Thanks for replying Flanders, so there is no way I can get the CTEK 2 zone panel to accept my setup... I will need a 9 zone panel?

 

[MJPD29]

Thanks for replying Flanders, so there is no way I can get the CTEK 2 zone panel to accept my setup... I will need a 9 zone panel?

Yes

 

[Flanders]

Yes unless you can rewire any of it. Not even sure you can get a 9 zone I think the biggest they go I'me 8 zone . With 4 sounder circuits . You will have to rewire some of it the detector in series

 

[peteronowak]

Yes unless you can rewire any of it. Not even sure you can get a 9 zone I think the biggest they go I'me 8 zone . With 4 sounder circuits . You will have to rewire some of it the detector in series

Huh... rewire does not sound like a option... any idea if there are any other panels (not CTEK) that would accept paralell wireing or have 9 zone panels?

 

[timhoward]

This means that I can no longer achieve a serial connection, instead I can connect it all in parallell and possibly put EOL at the end of each device.

NO!
An EOL on any one of the spurs will tell the panel that all of them of fault-free, so you could remove any of the heads and it wouldn't know about it.
Can you possibly pull 4-core through on one of the cable runes using the existing 2 core, and use an 8 zone panel?

 

[peteronowak]

NO!
An EOL on any one of the spurs will tell the panel that all of them of fault-free, so you could remove any of the heads and it wouldn't know about it.
Can you possibly pull 4-core through on one of the cable runes using the existing 2 core, and use an 8 zone panel?

yeah... I do know that this is messed up... making each wire connection one individual zone would be the obvious choice avoiding having to re-wire...

Any recommendation of a panel that would take this?

 

[MJPD29]

yeah... I do know that this is messed up... making each wire connection one individual zone would be the obvious choice avoiding having to re-wire...

Any recommendation of a panel that would take this?

I don’t think avoiding the rewire or at the least some additional cables is going to work

 

[peteronowak]

I don’t think avoiding the rewire or at the least some additional cables is going to work

so there are no panels out there that would accept a "parallel connection" of devices or be able to offer 9 zones? Every one of my detectors and call points are wired individially to the central point, enabling every one to become "a zone"

 

[timhoward]

so there are no panels out there that would accept a "parallel connection" of devices or be able to offer 9 zones? Every one of my detectors and call points are wired individially to the central point, enabling every one to become "a zone"

Normal conventional is out for reasons above.
Normal addressable is out as you haven't got a loop and manufactures have quite strict rules about spurs that I'm fairly sure you couldn't meet in this case.
So that leave's the special cases....
Twinflex Pro is out as it also has end-of-line.
The only panel I can think of that MAY work is the Infinity ID2 range. I say that because it doesn't use EOL devices, it learns the devices and polls them. I believe it would still work with two radials in one zone. Before taking my word for this please check this is supported by the manufacture. After all this is a critical life saving system.

I'd still highly recommend finding a solution that kept it 'normal' and compatible with the majority of panels.
Is there no way to run a cable between any two devices and discard one of the radials to the panel so you are down to 8 zones?