Addressable fire systems.
The fire safety market is undergoing changes both in the regulatory framework and in technologies.
But an ideal system that would suit all users has not yet been created.
Too many factors are at work when choosing, installing and maintaining fire protection systems.
Consequently, the main classes are formed, which are in demand among different users.
We will consider them, trying to pay attention only to the most important component of fire safety — the fire alarm itself, and we will dwell in more detail on addressable fire systems.
Classes of fire protection systems
What can we see now in the fire safety market, what systems are in demand and why does the buyer, customer, installer or designer choose one or another solution?
Fire protection systems are divided into three main classes: threshold (non-addressable), addressable and addressable-analog.
Fire detectors are initially designed to work in their class. For example, to use a threshold detector in an addressable or addressable-analogue system, additional components are required. Sometimes such connections are not entirely correct. To explain this, let's consider the pros and cons of each class.
Threshold (non-addressable) systems are the most well-known in the fire safety market.
Over the decades of existence of such systems, they have remained virtually unchanged.
The changes concerned only the electronics, smoke chamber and other components, but the operating principle remained unchanged.
Who registers a fire in this system?
The detector itself.
As a result, we get the following: even if a high-quality, expensive data processing system for detecting fires (a control panel — PKP) is installed at the facility, no matter how cool it is, everything will depend directly on the fire alarm.
For comparison, we can give the following example — war or maneuvers.
The army is headed by a general, and he may have a lot of experience, but victory in battle will still depend on how prepared and qualified the rank and file are.
What's going on in our system?
The same thing.
Its efficient operation depends entirely on the quality of the fire alarm.
The system's performance will directly depend on its quality and functionality.
Manufacturers are seriously struggling to reduce the cost, and as a result, they get a budget option, but is it functional?
After all, they often save on components that fail in the first years of operation, on plastic that cracks and breaks when cleaning the smoke chamber from dust, at the quality control stages, when only 1-2 detectors from a batch are checked.
And the results of the work of such detectors end up in incident reports.
How do the detectors included in non-addressable loops work?
Let's assume that there is a break in the loop where our «private» is connected — we lose the entire «platoon» located in the loop.
Now let's see what happens if for some reason a short circuit occurs. Almost the same thing. The entire squad is lost, and we do not control the zone.
The most unpleasant thing is that if one of the «fighters» is inoperative for some reason, then it is impossible to determine this in any way. And what if it is also an inexpensive detector, the manufacturer of which saved on everything?
How to deal with this?
First of all, carry out testing according to the operating instructions.
But a successful test does not mean that the detector continues to perform the mission assigned to it after some time.
The regulatory framework suggests installing at least two detectors, but who will guarantee that they both work and will detect a fire and prevent dire consequences. Accordingly, we repeat once again: when choosing systems, first of all, you need to look at the «ordinary» ones.
If you want to install a really working system, then buying cheaper detectors is simply a crime. The detector must be high-quality and reliable. The best way to check is comparative tests on real fire sources.
Another important point is the communication method.
Each detector is connected to the line sequentially, i.e. commands are transmitted along the chain, which increases the communication line immeasurably.
And given the price of cables, especially flame-resistant ones, is there any benefit? But this is a topic for a separate discussion.
These and other problems were practically impossible to solve within the framework of threshold systems. And the need for this became more and more urgent every year.
Therefore, the next stage in the evolution of fire alarms was the emergence of addressable technology.
Addressable systems
Foreign manufacturers were the first to introduce this technology. Russian companies appreciated its advantages and released their own solutions.
What is an addressable fire alarm system? What advantages does the user get?
Firstly, it is worth noting that the main component has remained unchanged, it is the same “ordinary” one – a fire alarm.
The operation of the entire system depends on its quality and reliability. But…
Each fire alarm communicates with the “general” (read the control panel) constantly, practically reporting on its status every second.
The control panel report includes not only information on smoke, but also the degree of dust, the operability of the components and other characteristics.
The communication channel with each detector is practically personal, it is possible to connect detectors in any way.
It is problematic to make a low-quality detector, how will it report on its operation if its components are inoperative?
This is also reflected in regulatory documents: addressable detectors can be installed less than threshold ones.
Addressable-analog systems
This is the most modern technology.
Here the dominance of the fire alarm ends, and it becomes a truly competent «private» who reports every second to his «general» about the state of the territory entrusted to him, but the command is given directly by the «general».
In other words, the priority of the system components changes.
Particular attention is paid to the control device, which processes a huge amount of information and, based on the results obtained, controls the facility, eliminating false alarms and responding as quickly as possible to any factor causing a fire.
These are the most serious systems and provide maximum protection against fires.
Modifications of addressable systems
Having dealt with the main classes of fire systems, let's consider the most popular modifications of addressable systems on the market at the moment.
The simplest and most straightforward method, which some manufacturers have chosen, is adding a so-called addressable tag to a standard threshold detector.
In fact, there is only one advantage: the number of the triggered detector is transmitted in parallel with the «fire» signal.
But this is only for an alarm message; at other times, the detector is as mute as a fish, i.e., there is no fundamental difference between threshold and addressable (non-polling) systems.
It is good when the consumer understands this and does not reassure himself that the address system installed meets all the requirements of reliability and performs its function indisputably better.
It is possible to install this type of system only for the sake of self-reassurance.
There are solutions in the fire safety market in which manufacturers use a certain address converter, a module in their equipment — the name of such a device is not regulated and depends on the imagination of marketers.
As a standard, there is some, possibly high-quality channel that combines several devices, creating an integrated system.
One of the components of the system is a fire alarm, standardly threshold, non-addressable, which needs to be connected to the general technological network. Schematically, it looks like this.
It is quite possible that the address bus itself contains equipment polling, performance monitoring, and many other functions inherent in addressable systems.
Moreover, such an address bus usually contains not only fire detectors, but also many other components of the system.
But let's analyze: the address block only controls a certain event at its input (trigger).
The system can poll and control the addressable unit directly via the address bus as much as it wants, but who cares about the detector that is connected to it?
How can I know that it is on guard and will not allow trouble?
Unfortunately, no way.
Control of operability, reliability, and efficiency will be carried out only on the line «receiving-control device — addressable unit», but not further.
The addressable unit is the boundary before the fire detector.
In a truly addressable system, the fire alarm communicates directly with the control panel, reporting its status to it at set intervals.
Moreover, the control panel communicates not through an intermediary, but directly with the addressable fire alarm.
The addressable unit in such systems is built into the alarm and is one with it, receiving not only a fire signal, but also all additional information.
Different manufacturers have different communication protocols, but in any case, information about the ignition factor is transmitted in no more than 10 seconds, and the malfunction is determined within a few minutes.
In addition, good addressable systems receive information about dustiness of detectors, low temperature at the installation site, drop in sensitivity, short circuit in the loop. And if the communication channel with the detectors is wireless, then information about the operability of the main and backup power sources.
The construction of an addressable system differs in functionality, in the method of transmitting information, etc. We can name several systems from different manufacturers, in which the receiving device is not an object device, but is intended to display information.
This receiving device is responsible for monitoring the status of detectors, decodes and provides detailed information on detected faults both in the loop and in a specific detector.
De facto, such receiving devices have executive relays for a specific fire factor or fault, with the help of which it is possible to control the control panel, and a panel with decoding of the message and/or the number of the detector that transmitted the message.
This can be schematically depicted as follows:
This approach makes it possible to use an inexpensive loop control panel with all the advantages of an addressable system.
But if you do not want to create a designer, you should pay attention to ready-made solutions based on addressable (polling) detectors.
There are addressable (polling) systems in which the detectors work directly with the control panel, which combines the function of receiving messages from the detectors and performing fire safety tasks at the facility.
There are many examples when both receiving devices and full-fledged control panels work with addressable detectors from one manufacturer.
Some manufacturers of addressable fire detectors transfer the protocol of communication with detectors for inclusion in the control panel of another manufacturer. The policy of OEM partnership of manufacturers is not a rare phenomenon in the industry.
Such an approach is completely justified and effective.
New technologies have made it possible to offer users an upgrade in the methods of transmitting data to receiving equipment.
Now, if you are not making serious protection and understand the level of some risk, and also want to simplify the installer's work, there is an opportunity to use a wireless address bus.
Please note that this is not about a qualitative change in the functional characteristics of the fire alarm, but only about replacing the information transmission channel.
If we examine the operating principle of radio channel equipment in more detail, then of all the classes of fire systems, only the addressable system is suitable for it.
It is unreasonable and economically unprofitable to make a threshold system on a radio channel, and an addressable analog one is not yet possible.
Fire-fighting radio channel systems operate on open radio frequencies occupied by other devices (car alarm key fobs, car pagers, amateur radio stations, etc.), and it is simply impossible to transmit smoke parameters every second over them.
If we draw an analogy with a road, then a wired system is a highway along which cars (messages) fly only from their detectors.
The road is free, there are no traffic jams.
But a radio channel is a city traffic jam, in which, in order to pass (transmit a signal), a lot of tricks will be required, and the speed will be minimal. In the best case, the detector will transmit a certain smoke level or another parameter when determining the fire factor.
If there is no fire factor, the radio channel detector will probably exchange control messages with the receiving device, but not so often as to speak of an addressable analog solution.
In radio channel systems, the fact of a fire is determined directly by the detector itself.
And this is the first sign of an addressable solution.