GE 350 Smoke detector

[jschumann]

I want to add tandem smokes and connect to my ELK, but getting conflicting information.

This place says the 350 doesn't do tandem:
http://www.barcodesinc.com/ge-security/part-350.htm

But the spec sheet leads me to believe it does:
http://www.homecontrols.com/homecontrols/pdf/ESL320A_Smoke.pdf

Thanks,
John

 

[sanders2222]

I'm looking for smokes as well. I like the price on these.

 

[Del91574]

Since you're in my home state and I know the area(s) quite well as well as dealing with the AHJ's, I would strongly suggest not using those units on that panel for the purpose you are intending. Many issues at hand.

 

[wuench]

The latter is correct, it is the manufacturer's datasheet.

350CC - Does not trigger relay from tandem (i.e. each unit must detect smoke to trigger it's relay) but all will alarm together
350CX - Triggers relay if any of the smokes alarm and all will alarm together
350 - No Relay, just alarms with others

320 series is same but no battery backup.


So I think normally you would just connect one 350CX to the panel and use 350's everywhere else. They will all alarm together like a normal 120V setup and if any go off they will trigger the panel. If you wanted to each smoke to trigger the panel on it's own so you would know where the alarm is occurring you can use all 350CC's but you can't really combine with 350's as a 350 going off wouldn't trigger the panel since the CC's only trigger off their own detection.

 

[jschumann]

Since you're in my home state and I know the area(s) quite well as well as dealing with the AHJ's, I would strongly suggest not using those units on that panel for the purpose you are intending. Many issues at hand.

Tell me more!!! I have 3 OLD 120v dectectors in tandem I want to replace all 3 with one of them having contacts to go to the ELK.....

 

[jschumann]

The latter is correct, it is the manufacturer's datasheet.

350CC - Does not trigger relay from tandem (i.e. each unit must detect smoke to trigger it's relay) but all will alarm together
350CX - Triggers relay if any of the smokes alarm and all will alarm together
350 - No Relay, just alarms with others

320 series is same but no battery backup.


So I think normally you would just connect one 350CX to the panel and use 350's everywhere else. They will all alarm together like a normal 120V setup and if any go off they will trigger the panel. If you wanted to each smoke to trigger the panel on it's own so you would know where the alarm is occurring you can use all 350CC's but you can't really combine with 350's as a 350 going off wouldn't trigger the panel since the CC's only trigger off their own detection.

Got it thanks! As I suspected, dealer site is wrong.

 

[Del91574]

Tell me more!!! I have 3 OLD dectectors in tandem I want to replace all 3 with one of them having contacts to go to the ELK.....

Without getting into a whole discussion regarding why this and other similar solutions are a bad idea and skirting the grey areas of what is permissible within code vs. a prudent solution, I'll just state the facts regarding the general area you are located in and my dealings with the AHJ's and some very large properties in the vicinity you live in as well as what you are proposing to do.

The better solution would be to remove the 120VAC feed from the detector circuit and then run enough conductors back to the M1 to either support a 2 wire or 4 wire loop. The existing romex can be reused and changed to a class 2 circuit to facilitate LV units, then take care of the supervision and tandem ring aspect via the M1. If this is not feizable, I'd recommend spot detection or a separate system from the 120V units.

The AHJ and insurers within the state will have an issue with the interconnection of systems not intended, nor listed for such purposes or the M1 panel itself. Ancilliary notification is OK, however for purposes of fire detection and notification, huge foul.

 

[jschumann]

Without getting into a whole discussion regarding why this and other similar solutions are a bad idea and skirting the grey areas of what is permissible within code vs. a prudent solution, I'll just state the facts regarding the general area you are located in and my dealings with the AHJ's and some very large properties in the vicinity you live in as well as what you are proposing to do.

The better solution would be to remove the 120VAC feed from the detector circuit and then run enough conductors back to the M1 to either support a 2 wire or 4 wire loop. The existing romex can be reused and changed to a class 2 circuit to facilitate LV units, then take care of the supervision and tandem ring aspect via the M1. If this is not feizable, I'd recommend spot detection or a separate system from the 120V units.

The AHJ and insurers within the state will have an issue with the interconnection of systems not intended, nor listed for such purposes or the M1 panel itself. Ancilliary notification is OK, however for purposes of fire detection and notification, huge foul.

Wow, why do the even make them then? I came darn close to just installing a relay to do the hookup......
So if I use existing wiring wouldn't the voltage drop be way too much for the 12 ga copper and 12V supplied by the panel?

 

[Del91574]

Nope, wiring is fine, as long as you maintain the wiring being "broken" and not pigtailed through.

The 120V smokes with ancilliary relays gets into a very grey point within code and what is and is not acceptable and what really should or should not be connected to a FACP. There's all sorts of ways to creatively interpret to what is permissible within code, however as an assembly, it's not compliant across the board in comparison to a 100% LV install.

Usually detectors like this are used to connect to monitoring points on commercial FACP's for the purpose of annunciation, not a fire alarm evacuation or signalling. Think hotel suite, dorm settings, etc.....you want to annunciate that an alarm may be occuring in a space, but based on false alarm criteria, dumping an entire building without an alarm being verified, not kosher. They're also used for remote annunciation, ie: hearing impaired or to trigger another system (dampers, doors, etc.)

There's plenty that will wave the flag of "I can do X or Y, the hardware supports it" at face value, however there are other factors to consider. In this case ,with 3 smokes and existing wiring, the cost is going to be the same and pretty much just as easy to do it with LV, barring removing the 120VAC from the smoke feeds and landing/capping it off in a suitable junction box separate from the LV.

 

[jschumann]

Nope, wiring is fine, as long as you maintain the wiring being "broken" and not pigtailed through.

The 120V smokes with ancilliary relays gets into a very grey point within code and what is and is not acceptable and what really should or should not be connected to a FACP. There's all sorts of ways to creatively interpret to what is permissible within code, however as an assembly, it's not compliant across the board in comparison to a 100% LV install.

Usually detectors like this are used to connect to monitoring points on commercial FACP's for the purpose of annunciation, not a fire alarm evacuation or signalling. Think hotel suite, dorm settings, etc.....you want to annunciate that an alarm may be occuring in a space, but based on false alarm criteria, dumping an entire building without an alarm being verified, not kosher. They're also used for remote annunciation, ie: hearing impaired or to trigger another system (dampers, doors, etc.)

There's plenty that will wave the flag of "I can do X or Y, the hardware supports it" at face value, however there are other factors to consider. In this case ,with 3 smokes and existing wiring, the cost is going to be the same and pretty much just as easy to do it with LV, barring removing the 120VAC from the smoke feeds and landing/capping it off in a suitable junction box separate from the LV.

Got it. So the heavy gauge copper won't be a problem for the system when 120 is disconnected?
The added feature is the supervisory aspect - signal to M1 if power loss or system trouble.

Thanks,
John

 

[Del91574]

Trivial at best.

We use that AWG and similar in commercial applications (although at 24VDC) due to voltage losses.

Personally, without inspecting the wiring and runs, I'd recommend running the loop as a 2 wire instead of 4 wire fire loop. Introduces the least amount of issues and allows the loop to be properly supervised if too few conductors were run or the wiring was "off" from a standard 14/3 or 12/3 daisy chain. Gives you the most amount of options.

 

[BraveSirRobbin]

Perform a search for GE350 on CocoonTech before making any decisions.

 

[Del91574]

BSR, respectfully, in this case, the CT forum doesn't have the correct information, as I've dealt with literally all the AHJ's in the section of the state where the OP is located and I know factually what they will accept and will not accept, in conjunction with the insurers within my home state, they will deny any HO claim upon loss due to said connection. I don't know about you or the OP, but I wouldn't want to open that can of worms and possible breech of insurance coverage....the specific clause on policies within our state is contained within gross misconduct and negligence sections for a HO and usually is contained within a rider for additional electronic security protection, since discounts on policies are typical with that rider. Same reason, as a pro, we have to contact the insurers when a client cancels or a system with fire alarm.

I've been deposed in the past and had to speak to counsel regarding said matters and connection to panels and incidents that had happened,on installs by other companies.

 

[jschumann]

BSR, respectfully, in this case, the CT forum doesn't have the correct information, as I've dealt with literally all the AHJ's in the section of the state where the OP is located and I know factually what they will accept and will not accept, in conjunction with the insurers within my home state, they will deny any HO claim upon loss due to said connection. I don't know about you or the OP, but I wouldn't want to open that can of worms and possible breech of insurance coverage....the specific clause on policies within our state is contained within gross misconduct and negligence sections for a HO and usually is contained within a rider for additional electronic security protection, since discounts on policies are typical with that rider. Same reason, as a pro, we have to contact the insurers when a client cancels or a system with fire alarm.

I've been deposed in the past and had to speak to counsel regarding said matters and connection to panels and incidents that had happened,on installs by other companies.

Thanks everybody for the input. I think I will leave my 120v system alone and just put some 2 wire units up and connect to the M1G. Also going to talk to local building inspector about fire dectors codes for this area.

Thanks again,
John

 

[ano]

The reason why I see these tandom smokes as bad, along with other reasons, is there is no supervison of the lines, either between smokes or beween the relay and the panel. Both two wireless and 4 wire smoke alarms are supervised. That is why I agree, leave the 120V smokes alone and run smokes that are made to be monitored to a panel that monitors them