Elk M1 - Smoke Detector Recommendations

[ccmichaelson]

I'm starting to pre-wire my new construction and electrician recommended that I hook smokes to my Elk M1 alarm panel (although he's clueless how to do it).  As I understand it, I can daisy chain 2-wire smokes to zone 16 or home run (and/or daisy chain) 4-wire smokes to any zone input.  My house is required to have fire sprinklers too (another thread topic later).
 
Questions
1)  Should I use 2-wire or 4-wire smokes?
2)  If 4-wire, should I daisy chain or home run?
3)  Which make/model is compatible (and recommended) with Elk M1?
4)  Required wire gauge and conductor per question #1?
5)  Additional tips/thoughts welcome!

 

[RAL]

Smoke detectors should always be daisy chained, whether they are 2-wire or 4-wire.   An exception would be 4-wire smokes with each wired to its own zone, but there are good reasons not to do that.
 
Code requires you to use 18 AWG fire-rated wire (e.g. FPL).
 
If you choose 2-wire smokes, then you have to use brands/models that are qualified for the M1.  There is a table on page 6 of the M1 manual that shows that.
System Sensor 2WT-B and 2WTA-B get good marks from others on Cocoontech.
 
If you choose 4-wire smokes detectors, then any brand will work with the M1 (although you shouldn't mix brands on one daisy chain).
 
There is a short thread here on some pros and cons of 2-wire vs 4-wire.
 
This thread on smoke detector basics might also be helpful.
 
One other thing to realize is that even with smoke detectors wired to the M1, your local building codes will probably still require you to have separate smoke alarms (the type you find at Home Depot that don't connect to an alarm panel).

 

[mikefamig]

I say wire so that you can make the decision between 4 wire or two wire later. Adding two leads to a cable is cheap compared to having remorse or having to add wires later.
 
Mike.

 

[ccmichaelson]

Smoke detectors should always be daisy chained, whether they are 2-wire or 4-wire.   An exception would be 4-wire smokes with each wired to its own zone, but there are good reasons not to do that.

 
Could you elaborate as to why I wouldn't want to home run each 4-wire smoke?  I'm home running every other touch point (e.g. window/door sensor, motion sensor, etc.) so that I know exactly which touch point is having an issue.  I'm not opposed to daisy chaining smokes if I understood why home running them is a bad decision.  BTW - I checked with local inspector and received their blessing to only have smokes tied to alarm panel.

 

[giesen]

The smokes I'm looking at are the Gentex GN-503FF ( https://www.gentex.com/sites/staging.gentex.com/files/GN503FF%20Flyer_web.pdf ). I haven't bought any yet, so I can't vouch for them but the feature set is amazing:
 
 
- 120VAC with 9VDC battery back-up
- GN-503FF features two (2) sets of Form A/C contacts that activate independently for smoke and CO events
- Relay contacts operate on battery back-up
- Push button self test feature
- Push button functional test feature
- Quick-disconnect wiring harness
- Non-latching (self restoring) alarm
- Tandem interconnect with Gentex GN-503, GN-503F, CO1209, CO1209F, S1209 and S1209F alarm models
- Low or missing battery indicator
- Temporal 3 evacuation sound pattern for smoke annunciation
- Temporal 4 evacuation sound pattern for CO annunciation
- End of life signal indicates CO sensor has reached depletion state and time to replace
 
 
So you can use the dry contacts to tie into your Elk system with independent Smoke and CO alarms (per detector), plus they tandem over AC power so when one sounds, they all sound (which is required here in Canuckistan), and have 9VDC battery back up. Not sure what else you can ask for. The only caveat I see is the problem with mixing AC and LV in the same box (which is typically not allowed by code) - not sure how to work around that yet.

 

[RAL]

Could you elaborate as to why I wouldn't want to home run each 4-wire smoke?  I'm home running every other touch point (e.g. window/door sensor, motion sensor, etc.) so that I know exactly which touch point is having an issue.  I'm not opposed to daisy chaining smokes if I understood why home running them is a bad decision.  BTW - I checked with local inspector and received their blessing to only have smokes tied to alarm panel.

 
 
With 4-wire smokes properly wired in a daisy chain, you place a power supervision relay at the end of the chain. The relay monitors power to the smokes, and if ANY smoke detectors in the chain loses power, the relay trips and signals the alarm panel.
 
If you home run the wires and connect them all to a single zone, you lose the ability to properly monitor the circuit to each smoke.
 
If you wire each smoke detector to its own zone, then it creates problems with what happens when you want to reset everything after an alarm.  DEL gave a good explanation in this thread.
 
There was a recent discussion in this other thread of how you could install 2-wire smokes using 4-wire home runs and then construct the daisy chain back at the panel.   But that doesn't really have much of an advantage if you are starting from scratch.

 

[ano]

So you can use the dry contacts to tie into your Elk system with independent Smoke and CO alarms (per detector), plus they tandem over AC power so when one sounds, they all sound (which is required here in Canuckistan), and have 9VDC battery back up. Not sure what else you can ask for. The only caveat I see is the problem with mixing AC and LV in the same box (which is typically not allowed by code) - not sure how to work around that yet.

I guess the only thing I would have top see is that this smoke alarm is approved to be connected to a monitored panel in the local where you live.  It would be fine for your required 120V interconnected smokes, which is one part of the equation. 
 
For example, how is the power to one of these smokes supervised by the panel? If the 9v battery is dead, does the panel know?  How long does the battery backup last if the power goes out? I don't know, some things don't sound kosher here. You might want to run this by an inspector in your area to see what he/she says. I don't beleive it would be approved here.
 
One more thing. This is a photoelectric smoke, which is fine, but I would include some ionization smokes in your home also. They respond faster to many types of fires.

 

[Del91574]

Ugh.
 
The Gentex units are NOT listed for UL (Canadian UL might be different) connection to a listed alarm panel for monitoring purposes. Straight from Gentex themselves. I'm not getting into the specifics and applications they are intended for and installed in, but connected to a FACP is not one of them. There is also zero supervision of the detectors and loop, again a huge no-no when it comes to fire on a FACP.
 
There are ways to make a compliant tandem ring install using LV detectors, modules and the like. The only reason why they wouldn't be permissible would be if the AHJ specifically wanted line voltage powered devices and standalone from the alarm panel.
 
There are multiple ways to do either 2 or 4 wire, and I'd recommend going 2 wire and getting all appropriate modules to facilitate the install, however wire the loop as a 4 wire loop. By the inherent nature, a 4 wire loop is more difficult for most novices to wire correctly as well as include the appropriate parts to supervise (actually costs more to install on the component side).
 
Ionization detectors, especially on a monitored system (with dumb loops) are a notoriously bad idea. The largest item coming to fruition now is they are considered hazardous waste upon EOL. The other item is there's really no sensitivity adjustments to get around a system design issue. Too close to a kitchen or stratification point, you cook, they're going off. Ions respond to the products of combustion, either intentional or via cooking. They've be essentially abandoned in the commercial world and very seldom replaced with new ion units.
 
The only item running home runs of 4/18 or 8/18 for the smokes (YMMV for conductor counts based on style) would be allowing for a damaged conductor or two on a single cable. Other than that, it really doesn't get you much.
 
As far as putting 120V detectors via module X or Y or using relay ABC to the M1....it's a bad idea and technically not allowable via NFPA. What they allow in Canadialand generally is quite similar to what is and is not allowable down here.

 

[giesen]

Ugh.
 
The Gentex units are NOT listed for UL (Canadian UL might be different) connection to a listed alarm panel for monitoring purposes. Straight from Gentex themselves. I'm not getting into the specifics and applications they are intended for and installed in, but connected to a FACP is not one of them. There is also zero supervision of the detectors and loop, again a huge no-no when it comes to fire on a FACP.
 
There are ways to make a compliant tandem ring install using LV detectors, modules and the like. The only reason why they wouldn't be permissible would be if the AHJ specifically wanted line voltage powered devices and standalone from the alarm panel.
 
There are multiple ways to do either 2 or 4 wire, and I'd recommend going 2 wire and getting all appropriate modules to facilitate the install, however wire the loop as a 4 wire loop. By the inherent nature, a 4 wire loop is more difficult for most novices to wire correctly as well as include the appropriate parts to supervise (actually costs more to install on the component side).
 
Ionization detectors, especially on a monitored system (with dumb loops) are a notoriously bad idea. The largest item coming to fruition now is they are considered hazardous waste upon EOL. The other item is there's really no sensitivity adjustments to get around a system design issue. Too close to a kitchen or stratification point, you cook, they're going off. Ions respond to the products of combustion, either intentional or via cooking. They've be essentially abandoned in the commercial world and very seldom replaced with new ion units.
 
The only item running home runs of 4/18 or 8/18 for the smokes (YMMV for conductor counts based on style) would be allowing for a damaged conductor or two on a single cable. Other than that, it really doesn't get you much.
 
As far as putting 120V detectors via module X or Y or using relay ABC to the M1....it's a bad idea and technically not allowable via NFPA. What they allow in Canadialand generally is quite similar to what is and is not allowable down here.

 
 
DEL,
 
Not to beat a dead horse, and I agree they don't show a UL268 listing (only UL217), but I think they're in a bit of a grey area because they're actually Smoke Alarms, not Smoke Detectors (ie they alert locally without depending on the panel). Despite what you've said about Gentex's intentions for this device, right in their instructions ( https://www.gentex.com/sites/staging.gentex.com/files/GN503FF%20Flyer_web.pdf ) they list how to interconnect to a FACP "Proper Connection of a Gentex GN-503FF to a Fire Alarm Control Panel (FACP)". And because they sound locally, the FACP interconnection is not considered life-safety (but rather property protection), as a such may not require UL268 listing. Now you might argue Gentex doesn't intend for the interconnection to an FACP to be a monitored interconnection and that's fine. At worst, I can interconnect to my panel purely for self-monitoring and informational purposes (ie to log and track which device sounded), and they'll still meet my requirements to have line-voltage tandem smoke detectors, as there's no way I'm installing two sets of smokes in every room (alarm and detector),

 

[Del91574]

In the case of HV vs. LV detectors and what is allowable within code, I'm not going to touch on Canada in this case because I don't have the documentation in front of me, but there is no code requirement that states detectors must be HV powered. If an AHJ is citing something, make them show the specific place within the codes where it says they MUST be HV powered. It's not there and it does not exist. The only restriction would be what is considered "customary" in a locale or a specific requirement. If you can prove a LV system meets or exceeds the design criteria cited within code it's a very good item to put out there and I have yet see where an AHJ, fire marshal or building official not allow something that exceeds the design criteria they are citing. Misinformation is the key and why they don't allow them. The only time I had an AHJ not want LV detectors is they cited what happens if service is suspended (monitoring) to the panel or something happens. Went up to the state level and the AHJ was overruled.
 
Without getting into listings and what is permissible and not and the entire level of UL listing.
 
They are not listed for connection to a FACP for alarm or evacuation purposes. Period. The second portion of that listing would also entail what is not supervised on the portion of the connection to the host panel. There is absolutely no way the opposite side of the relay coil would be able to be supervised for operation, nor would power loss change the state of the relay. That's the largest item of why they're not listed. Signalling, yes, but evacuation, no. Second largest reason is the alarms will not latch.
 
Put it this way, what you listed is a data sheet, not the manufacturer's installation documents.
 
The units are intended and designed to interface with auxiliary equipment/notification devices, such as in the case of hearing impaired installation, or for the purpose of informing a larger system of an activation for strictly informative purposes, not for annunciation or evac.
 
I have a residential hotel with a couple hundred and condo apartment complex of 700 units (with 2-4 units installed in each) with these connected to a multi-node intelligent FACP. You need to be very careful as to what they are being connected to and the operation of the interconnected system. I am very familiar with the application and what you want to do vs. what is black, white and grey with the application. Once you get into grey areas, it's a very slippery slope.