Shared dualcom

[tinnitus]

Hi guys, hope you’re all safe? I know this has been asked a thousand times and will probably get me some grief for asking again but hey ho. 
what are the regs for an intruder alarm and a fire system sharing a dualcom? I’m assuming a few things, it has to be fire rated point to point seems obvious but how  can the alarm panel be fire rated? Surely that’s the week point? Like drilling a hole in a fire rated door or wall and not using fire stop etc.? Obviously it’s just easier to use two separate dualcom’s but then the cost goes way up. Anyway, hope this isn’t too annoying. Thanks in advance guys. 

[PeterJames]

I am fairly certain that if the Fire alarm has to be monitored with brigade response it has to have its own monitoring in order to be fully compliant. If the fire alarm doesnt have to be monitored but you want brigade response thats a grey area. If it doesnt need to be monitored nor does it need brigade response (keyholder only) you can connect it to the intruder.

[MrHappy]

The main beef is the intruder alarm does not meet with the standby times required in 5839

 

If you want to share signalling & everything is documented its fine IMHO (dependant on the site)

 

 

 

 

[james.wilson]

As above you need the standby times for fire and reporting of fault to the fire panel. Should be dedicated. It can be done but keeping both sets of regs complaint is the issue. ie fault monitoring to both systems

[tinnitus]

48 minutes ago, PeterJames said:

I am fairly certain that if the Fire alarm has to be monitored with brigade response it has to have its own monitoring in order to be fully compliant. If the fire alarm doesnt have to be monitored but you want brigade response thats a grey area. If it doesnt need to be monitored nor does it need brigade response (keyholder only) you can connect it to the intruder.

Hi Peter, I think that’s a huge factor, I didn’t think about that. If no brigade response is required then it’s probably a lot more relaxed. Just to clarify, I’m not saying the intruder will signal fire, just that both systems use the same dualcom. 

Edited April 14, 2020 by tinnitus

[tinnitus]

23 minutes ago, MrHappy said:

The main beef is the intruder alarm does not meet with the standby times required in 5839

 

If you want to share signalling & everything is documented its fine IMHO (dependant on the site)

 

 

 

 

I’m thinking the fire and intruder signal separately through the same dualcom. Are you talking about the ARC response time?

[sixwheeledbeast]

I would agree with PJ the first question ask is if the system specificly requires monitoring for insurance or if it's just for keyholder only.

There are no regs for sharing equipment so difficult to make both systems conform to each others.

When it comes to cost it's a life safety system so if the RA says the fire needs comms then I wouldn't see sharing the intruder being an option to offer at all.

1 minute ago, tinnitus said:

I’m thinking the fire and intruder signal separately through the same dualcom. Are you talking about the ARC response time?

Battery standby

[MrHappy]

@tinnitus ask the client whether they a want exclusive signalling which conforms to 5839

 

should they wince offer shared signalling, but arse cover

 

do your signalling if you do not maintain the fire alarm

[norman]

Providing its not an insurance requirement (rarely ime) I'm a big advocate of any signalling is better than none. As an engineer I arranged for lots of sites to be signalled through the intruder (paperwork caveat etc included) 

 

 

[MrHappy]

I have a factory, they bounced my expensive controls with radial cards

 

& put a plaggy c-tec + vesda cause it had to be BAFE, but retained my signalling.

 

I ceased it 4 yrs ago &  its never go back on signalling....