# Fire-Lite 9600 udls



## NacBooster29 (Oct 25, 2010)

I have a fire lite 9600 udls. One slc loop. Approximately 140 devices total. The length of the slc is about 2,600' total. Run class A style 6. 
All works great . During a circuit integraty test +/- ground faults, opens etc. The positive ground fault condition , causes a random amount of devices to go missing from the loop.
The devices are not in sequence of address, or physical location.
We duplicated this test with no isolation modules installed, same results.
The supplier told us to add (2) 4.7 k resistors across +,-. Spaced in the slc loop into thirds. 
This method worked, but now the engineer wants written approval from fire lite that this method does not impair or void the listing on the panel...
Anyone have this issue ever? How do you resolve this? I'm the pipe and wire guy not the supplier/ programmer.


----------



## LARMGUY (Aug 22, 2010)

NacBooster29 said:


> I have a fire lite 9600 udls. One slc loop. Approximately 140 devices total. The length of the slc is about 2,600' total. Run class A style 6.
> All works great . During a circuit integraty test +/- ground faults, opens etc. The positive ground fault condition , causes a random amount of devices to go missing from the loop.
> The devices are not in sequence of address, or physical location.
> We duplicated this test with no isolation modules installed, same results.
> ...


 
It's really not your problem. 

The supplier is a stocking dealer or parts and smarts? The supplier must have run into the situation before and has been told how to fix it by tech support. Call the supplier and tell them they need to produce their engineers drawing for the addition and any supporting documents from Fire Lite.


----------



## NacBooster29 (Oct 25, 2010)

There is a division between the supplier, tech support and myself. We installed thhn/thwn in conduit. They insist it must be twisted pair. The installation manual says over 3k' use twisted pair. 
My stance is what about the other thousand or so panels I've worked in or installed with just thhn? Why are those ok, but a new system sugests using twisted, but doesn't require it.
It's been not fun trying to get this done.


----------



## LARMGUY (Aug 22, 2010)

NacBooster29 said:


> There is a division between the supplier, tech support and myself. We installed thhn/thwn in conduit. They insist it must be twisted pair. The installation manual says over 3k' use twisted pair.
> My stance is what about the other thousand or so panels I've worked in or installed with just thhn? Why are those ok, but a new system sugests using twisted, but doesn't require it.
> It's been not fun trying to get this done.


"They" meaning supplier? Tech support? The difference is probably the type of communication loop they are using. You would be sruprised how these tech gurus can screw up RS485. We had a fiasco with a proprietary RS 485 loop and a fortune 500 company that almost cost us the customer and about 10 jobs from the salesman down to me.

Another time I used 18 ga shielded wire to a PTZ camera for communication. (Sensornet) It didn't work. Tech support told me it was because of the shield and drain wire. They even refused to talk to me until a new wire was pulled. I cut the shield in three places on the 100ft run and never had a problem afterward. Go figure.


----------



## etb (Sep 8, 2010)

LARMGUY said:


> Another time I used 18 ga shielded wire to a PTZ camera for communication. (Sensornet) It didn't work. Tech support told me it was because of the shield and drain wire. They even refused to talk to me until a new wire was pulled. I cut the shield in three places on the 100ft run and never had a problem afterward. Go figure.


Conductor-to-shield capacitance can kill, but I'm surprised it was a problem on only 100'; must have been some fast signals.


----------



## greenman (Apr 20, 2012)

Get a new panel.


----------



## greenman (Apr 20, 2012)

I know some of these panel have had issues, and as a fire alarm tec,
I would not pass it. Some of tec suport guys know coook soup.
Most likley cpu or software, ngf They no not want to pay for your time to replace it.
I worked for a notifier dealer, we got pay to swap the cpu, but we told the customer it was a issue with chassi,
firelite & notifier are made by the same company.

http://www.firelite.com/products/ms9600ls.html
http://www.notifier.com/products/pages/firewarden-50.htm


----------



## greenman (Apr 20, 2012)

Boath sold by honeywell.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

The chances are really good that one of your modules has ground fault on the indicating loop. If I recall, those modules do not isolate the indicating loop, but will pass along any faults back to the slc, and they will do so without any indication of which module it is.

The install really should be twisted shielded, but that should not be the problem here.


----------



## NacBooster29 (Oct 25, 2010)

eejack said:


> The chances are really good that one of your modules has ground fault on the indicating loop. If I recall, those modules do not isolate the indicating loop, but will pass along any faults back to the slc, and they will do so without any indication of which module it is.
> 
> The install really should be twisted shielded, but that should not be the problem here.


There are no existing faults, on any circuits. The building in question has two remote power supplies(nac boosters) both of which are tripped off a nac on the facp. The only field mods are isolation mods, and 1 relay mod to trip the radio master box.
Twisted shielded is only required by fire lite when you are using the clip, polling protocol. 
One reason the engineers speced fire lite is cost. For that reason we run plain old thhn in 1/2" emt. In a perfect world is run twisted Shielded. But since it is not required or speced, it be a waste of money and conduit fill.
I forgot to say the only issue with the panel is when we do circuit integrity checks . I.e. opens, shorts, ground faults. All ISO mods function properly, any net gnd fault reports properly , as soon as a positive gnd fault occurs any number of devices on the slc loop go missing, with no relation to location, or address.. 
This is the only time I've encountered this issue ever, with any brand of panel. And I've installed many.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

NacBooster29 said:


> This is the only time I've encountered this issue ever, with any brand of panel. And I've installed many.


I'm slightly confused - you say there are only three modules on the system, then speak of the slc losing devices. Typically the positive ground faults we get on these systems are modules on the slc, terminal #3 if I recall properly. Same behavior - random devices dropping out.

Nine times out of ten it is a tight fit against the 1900 box it is mounted in.

In the systems we have installed, they would not approve a system with randomly inserted resistors.

Best of luck trying to work this out.


----------



## NacBooster29 (Oct 25, 2010)

The positive ground fault is one, which the engineers make us create. Take a jumper from + to the grounded box. They want to simulate all possible faults that can happen. It may just be a Rhode Island thing.
My point about only three mods, was that. We are not tripping boosters via a control mod. We are doing a side trip. Each booster supervises the nac's and on its output. And reports to a monitor module, if there is a nac trouble.


----------



## eejack (Jul 14, 2012)

NacBooster29 said:


> The positive ground fault is one, which the engineers make us create. Take a jumper from + to the grounded box. They want to simulate all possible faults that can happen. It may just be a Rhode Island thing.
> My point about only three mods, was that. We are not tripping boosters via a control mod. We are doing a side trip. Each booster supervises the nac's and on its output. And reports to a monitor module, if there is a nac trouble.


Ah...that makes sense - I have never had to recreate those kinds of conditions here in NJ.

I don't know what to suggest instead of the resistors. Perhaps a monitor module at those same split points would provide enough resistance to serve the same function ( and would require no letter ).


----------



## NacBooster29 (Oct 25, 2010)

Update.
I had an old fire lite 9200. The typical fire life panel which accepts 99 detectors, and 99 modules. 
I installed the chasis in the old panel, and duplicated all the fault conditions. And the panel functioned as intended. 
The supplier is bringing a new facp tommorow and were going to program and test it. Hopefully put this issue to bed.
Call it a bum panel?


----------

