# Is This Compliant?



## Chris1971 (Dec 27, 2010)

From a building code standpoint, would this be compliant? Customer has 9 hard wired and interconnected smoke detectors. Customer wants to replace 9 existing smoke detectors with 9 Nest smoke detectors. The Nest smoke detectors are hard wired for power but, they all communicate wirelessly with each other. Do smoke detectors need to be interconnected with a wire or are they allowed to communicate wirelessly?


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

It depends on local codes. Here, they are required to be interconnected for new construction, but can be wireless for existing upgrades. So, it would depend on what code what in effect when the house was built.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

I am really curious as to what these NEST smokes are communicating about. If I only could be a NEST smoke on the ceiling for a day......oh the stories I could tell


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

Seriously though, I would call your local inspector to find out. Technology sometimes is faster than local rules and/or there might be differences in whether it can be used in new construction or remodel work only


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Iirc , firex makes a '_wireless interconnect_' model , good for meeting local codes (like NH) ~CS~


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

For residential ,Ohio adopted the 2010 NFPA 72
In my area , there are a few communities that
are rogue departments (not participants of Ohio
Bulding & Standards.

In those few communities one has to check with
thier local inspector , but for the majority of those
who are an extension of Ohio Building & Standards
this wireless interconnect would meet the code
requirement from NFPA 72 single & multi family 
dwellings early warning standards.


----------



## active1 (Dec 29, 2009)

First disclaimer, I'm not a F/A expert. I chose the latest 2016 NFPA 72 for reference, but wireless is not new.

The same questions came up about 10 years ago when wireless interconnect smoke alarms came on the market, ideally for retrofit. 

The first thing that needs to be straightened out, is it a smoke alarm or smoke detector.
2 different sets of rules and meanings.

3.3.267 Smoke Detector - See Detector

3.3.66 Detector - A device suitable for connection to a circuit that has a sensor that responds to physical stimulus such as gas, heat, or smoke (think of a fire alarm system with a fire alarm control panel and separate signaling devices like horns, speakers, & strobes that can perform other functions like contact a central station, recall elevators, move fire dampers).

3.3.265 Smoke and Heat Alarms - A single or multi-station alarm that responds to smoke (A self contained detector with alarm signaling that may connect to other self contained units)

The Nest instructions uses the term smoke alarm and instructions show replacing smoke alarms.

23.16.3.1 When a wireless initiating device is actuated, it's low-power radio transmitter / transceiver shall automatically transmit an alarm signal.

A.23.16.1 Equipment limited solely for dwelling unit use would not comply with this requirement.

That alone sounds like a no go. Ch 23 is fire alarm systems. Again it's not a fire alarm system.

There are many other references to wireless systems, but nothing I know of that meets this situation.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

Very strange wording. Taking a step back it's perfectly legal in a residential system to have no central monitoring at all. Self-contained smoke alarms throughout the house are perfectly acceptable and that has been the standard for years while centralized systems are required for other types of buildings.

This makes sense because typically in hotels or commercial buildings, the "building manager" is responsible for contacting and coordinating with local emergency services as well as getting people out of the building, and the physical size of most buildings makes it impossible to hear the smoke alarms in more remote parts of the structure.

A typical fire alarm system has 2 wires used for combined signals and power. It has a termination resistor at the end of the line of fire alarm sensors. An individual sensor can send signals by either open-circuiting the pair of wires or shorting them together, changing the resistance seen by the centralized monitor. Multiple smoke alarms can be on the same pair of wires. This is what Chapter 23 systems are talking about.

In comparison we can look at railroad, crane, and industrial safety wireless networking systems for comparison to systems that could potentially meet Chapter 23 requirements. With railroad and crane systems there is a continuous transmission of a carrier signal. Loss of carrier (transmitter) causes the system to shut down the equipment safely. Industrial network systems work slightly differently. Packets are continuously transmitted by the sensor at a defined rate such as 10 packets per second. Loss of more than typically 3 packets in a row (so 0.3 seconds without a packet for instance) also signal "loss of signal' and cause the system to respond with a safe shutdown. Once a shutdown starts, it cannot be stopped. Once the system stops completely, a separate reset command unlocks it so that a start command can be used to restart.

Keep in mind that whether or not the system is wireless doesn't matter. But with a battery system unless the overall system is for intermittent use (as with crane pendants), batteries are quickly depleted so really it has to rely on wired power for long term use such as a fire alarm system. So we really haven't gotten rid of the wires but simply allowed for a much larger variety of signals, potentially with backward compatibility.

In comparison, NEST isn't this. It could be but it's not. Really NEST is more of a monitoring/diagnostic system, not really intended for safety at all. Each NEST fire alarm is stand alone so it meets the definition of a typical residential system but it is not a centralized monitoring/alarming system. As long as it isn't required as per LS101 or NFPA 72 (and for most residences it wouldn't be) then it is basically just an enhanced version of the typical $20 residential fire alarm. If NEST were going to displace the commercial fire alarm systems out there then it should implement the same very simple and inexpensive communication system using relays that centralized fire alarms have used for years. This would make it interchangeable with both existing and future systems.


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

Chris I have this exact same quandary in a job. 2 floors open, 1 floor not...I want to do all wifi. Waiting on ahj to tell me what he's cool with.


----------



## active1 (Dec 29, 2009)

@ paulengr

This is sold as is a wireless smoke alarm.
You described a conventional fire alarm system.
That's a common mistake is when the two get mixed up.
Like talking bananas and potatoes. 

Think of it this way. A fire alarm system has a control panel with inputs and outputs.
A smoke detector is a stand alone device. Connect power and your done.
It can interconnect with other stand alone devices.

Do the nest use the interconnect wire.
Looks like a no, 2 wire connection.
So it does not use the wired interconnection.
If they had a wired interconnection like standard smoke alarms with an additional wireless messaging, it would be much better IMO.

For wireless is does matter in NFPA 72.
Tons of rules apply for wireless.
To start, wireless smoke alarm 29.7.8.1, 29.7.8.1.1, 23.16

Using


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

active1 said:


> @ paulengr
> 
> This is sold as is a wireless smoke alarm.
> You described a conventional fire alarm system.
> ...


I agree and that's my point. Sometimes NFPA wording can be confusing, like reading NEC back to front.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk


----------



## active1 (Dec 29, 2009)

The trouble is for the wireless smoke detectors NFPA 72 seems to have you jump all around the book looking for an answer on this. Next thing your referred to read about a wireless fire alarm system when you only have wireless smoke detectors.

Looking again about my 1st post:
23.16.3.1 When a wireless initiating device is actuated, it's low-power radio transmitter / transceiver shall automatically transmit an alarm signal.
A.23.16.1 Equipment limited solely for dwelling unit use would not comply with this requirement.

I think I was wrong earlier. Seems that the A.23.16.1 is only stating that for dwelling units there are less stringent requirements.

If this was a fire alarm system it should provide a trouble signal if one of the alarms quits working. But smoke alarms don't need to do that. Being reliant on wireless how would you know if a wireless detector quit functioning. An automated email wouldn't seem acceptable IMO. A different homeowner that moves in would need to have his smoke alarms reprogrammed to their current email address. It's really getting into a monitoring situation

There were stories about security alarm companies selling systems with fire alarms.
But the fire alarm systems were not complaint with NFPA 72 because of design reasons. I understand the concept is only to notify you if there is a fire detected. But it's crossing into fire alarm territory. Can't really do it half way. Depending on the state laws and enforcement it could get you into some hot water by installing parts of a fire alarm system or non complaint system. Most likely nothing would ever happen. But if there is ever a fire, part of the investigation would be the fire notification and protection system.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

NFPA 101 (Life Safety Code) is more of the thou shall stuff. It says when fire alarms or smoke detectors are needed, number and size of egress, distances to exits, special fire barriers, etc. Got into this a little with a tire plant that was expanding and the building was getting a bit too “wide” so sprinklers became required. NFPA 72 is more of a how, so it probably doesn’t make sense without NFPA 101 for context. The emergency power stuff is scatter brained like that too.

My house came with a run of smoke detectors reporting back to a centralized alarm panel with the same commercial self diagnostic Honeywell smoke detectors. And a friend lives so close theirs is actually wired to the local fire department directly. There really isn’t any major difference between a Honeywell fire alarm panel and say a Honeywell security system. If it’s more of say an ELK not sure what would make it different.

On a practical note monitored systems both fire and security at least in NC in government offices all signal all events back to a “Phoenix” system that archives and tracks all of it. The state offices downtown all have even door locks tied into it. The state employees said all systems but weren’t sure if it imcliddd private systems. I did a job on a support system so I know a little about it but I never actually laid eyes on any part of the system itself.

So whether the lawyers and NFPA try to parse things differently centralized security and fire alarms are practically the same. Smoke detectors are another story and can be tied in but often are not.

Keep in mind most security and fire systems are alarm/early warning only. That’s all NFPA requires. Some areas are more strict than others though. For instance prisons and airports and some military base areas, ports, and even some ground shipping terminals are much tighter, far beyond NFPA minimums. Fire hazards are also taken much more strict in wood plants and gas and oil operations. I’ve worked in all of these so I’ve seen it first hand.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

paulengr said:


> In comparison, NEST isn't this. It could be but it's not. Really NEST is more of a monitoring/diagnostic system, not really intended for safety at all. Each NEST fire alarm is stand alone so it meets the definition of a typical residential system but it is not a centralized monitoring/alarming system. As long as it isn't required as per LS101 or NFPA 72 (and for most residences it wouldn't be) then it is basically just an enhanced version of the typical $20 residential fire alarm. If NEST were going to displace the commercial fire alarm systems out there then it should implement the same very simple and inexpensive communication system using relays that centralized fire alarms have used for years. This would make it interchangeable with both existing and future systems.


This is _interesting_ Paul.

A "NEST" smoke really isn't on our states menu (who adopt it from NFPA72), but i had a customer_ insist_ i install one the other day

Said customer was also on the job to '_test_' the unit , additionally showing me it's notification on his smart phone (_admittedly smarter than i'll ever be_)

*VS*. all the alarm companies that would normally gain the signal first

The thing with this is , i live in skibunny central , more 2nd homes than anything else as one gets closer to the "_promised land of sliding down mountains on two sticks_"

The alarm companies have _proliferated_ the market, especially due to their offerings of fire and burglar protection. 

They've undercut and pushed out any of the_ old_ fire system installers that do not monitor, because they can monitor and assume monthly charges for doing so

I let my FA attachment go years ago due to this (_that,and i was analog not digitally trained_)

So we ended up with a *LOT* of alarmed homes,condo's, etc here. 

The problem being local FD & PD threw up their hands chasing _false_ alarms , some tried to charge after repeated '_cry wolf'_ scenarios, most simply gave up due to lack of full time manpower.

In many instances the _only_ responding entity became the county sheriff, who apparently had nothing better to do 

Remote areas would _maybe _see him in under 2 hours, depending if he had to get out of bed, defrost his cruiser ,etc.

Given a bona fide event, the home could be a_ smoking_ cellar hole and/or dust settled from the _stuffed_ Uhaul going down the road.

So I can see how the industry might be _threatened _by instant smart ph technology ,and it's *big *industry either way Grinnell V US being just one example

~CS~


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Steve, it's a shame that no one can trust anything that you say. Something in that long post you just made might actually be correct, but we will never know.


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

chicken steve said:


> This is _interesting_ Paul.
> 
> A "NEST" smoke really isn't on our states menu (who adopt it from NFPA72), but i had a customer_ insist_ i install one the other day
> 
> ...


I had a customer couple years back ask me to give him a price on
a change order for those Nest smoke alarms...didn't do it ...I priced
it really high cause I have to warranty them and I do not like being
the field tester for new products I know little to nothing about.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

Remote monitoring companies are running the same scam as cell phone companies. Say you BUY (gasp!) a brand new premium S8 cell phone. That will set you back $800, street price. If you buy in bulk and slap a Verizon sticker on it maybe you can get them for $700. Most cell phone companies then divide by 24 or about $30/month and tack that onto the cell phone service charge of around $40/month plus other bull crap fees to arrive at a monthly rate of $99/month which customers happily pay. You COULD go with an MVNO that strips away the so-called lease and some of the extraneous profit and get it down to around $50/month including taxes but in order to do it you pony up $800 up front for your fancy cell phone. At the end of 24 months, guess what the new price is? Yep, $99/month.

A stripped down monitoring-only company is around $15/month. A cell data service (just a low volume cell phone/internet connection, all automated, no humans) runs around $5/month (something we use for say remote well monitoring). BUT although the time horizon is longer, the various fire/alarm companies charge around $40-$60/month but the installation is "free" or almost "free". Again they price it for 24 to maybe 36 months and since they keep the master password on your fire/burglar alarm if you walk, they keep the keys to your system. At the end of 24-36 months, you're nothing but a profit for them. Compare that to again a $600-$1000 installation job up front plus the $15 remote monitoring service.

Same scam that you see all over the country from the "rent to own" stores that offer seemingly too-good-to-be-true prices for "leases". It happens to businesses too. I can't tell you how many pieces of office equipment, trailers, even heavy/mobile equipment that has been tied up in GMAC or GE Capital financing only to see that the lease never expired for YEARS past the point where the equipment was bought and paid for.

So if NEST or Simply Safe or similar companies come along and offer the hardware in a DIY or nearly DIY format for roughly the parts only cost without installation and drastically undercut the "lease to own" scam, you get why the customers jump on it.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

lighterup said:


> I had a customer couple years back ask me to give him a price on
> a change order for those Nest smoke alarms...didn't do it ...I priced
> it really high cause I have to warranty them and I do not like being
> the field tester for new products I know little to nothing about.




Yup, i'm not big on _backing up_ an unknown product either Lighter

This customer purchased his _own _nest alarm , i was merely the _installer_

My comeback to _any_ computer ,software technology is i'm an electrician, not a programmer 

That probably makes me a less marketable _dinosaur_ , but i'm not about to endeavor into a field where the millennials would pluck me _naked _rather quickly.....:crying:~CS~


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

paulengr said:


> > Remote monitoring companies are running the same scam as cell phone companies. Say you BUY (gasp!) a brand new premium S8 cell phone. That will set you back $800, street price. If you buy in bulk and slap a Verizon sticker on it maybe you can get them for $700. Most cell phone companies then divide by 24 or about $30/month and tack that onto the cell phone service charge of around $40/month plus other bull crap fees to arrive at a monthly rate of $99/month which customers happily pay. You COULD go with an MVNO that strips away the so-called lease and some of the extraneous profit and get it down to around $50/month including taxes but in order to do it you pony up $800 up front for your fancy cell phone. At the end of 24 months, guess what the new price is? Yep, $99/month.
> 
> 
> Had to look MVNO, up ,are those the 'throw away phones'?
> ...


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

chicken steve said:


> Makes me wonder just how many FA lobbyists are flocking to the NPFA CMP's to either run interference , or be the underdog for new technology Paul
> 
> ~CS~


Kinda like Kenny did for the Kenny clamp? The only difference is that the Kenny clamp is so unnecessary that the CMP never changed the code and no one uses the clamp.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

MVNO is a cell service company where they buy air time in bulk from AT&T, Verizon, etc. then resell it at a huge discount. You bring your own phone. They give you the SIM. It’s such a big deal that even Walmart bought an MVNO and sells it with the “Straight Talk” brand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

I do programming and electrical work but I don’t like programming. If you go down that road you will find the Millenials don’t have the old dog experience and spent too much time pushing joystick buttons or smoking dooe and not enough turning wrenches. I can run circles around them and I’m almost 50 both as conduit fitter and keyboard jockey. Keyboard jockeys don’t know how anything works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

