• Save
Global Fire Equipment  Networking Fire Detection Systems
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Global Fire Equipment Networking Fire Detection Systems



GFE\'s Product Profile

GFE\'s Product Profile
Networked Systems
Do\'s and Dont\'s



Total Views
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 4

http://www.slideshare.net 3
http://www.linkedin.com 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Global Fire Equipment  Networking Fire Detection Systems Global Fire Equipment Networking Fire Detection Systems Presentation Transcript

    • Fire Detection Systems Networks
      • Manufacturer of Fire Detection Systems
      • Based in Faro, Portugal since 2000
      • 50 Employees in 1200 sq. Meter facility
      • In house manufacturing from PCB assembly to finished product
      • Pick and place surface mount technology
      • TQC- Total Quality Control
      • Miguel de Sousa
      • GFE’s Technical Director
      • 20 Years Experience:
        • Electronic Systems Design
        • Fire Detection Systems
        • Security
        • R & D Project Management
      • Zicom – Building Solutions Group
      • Global Fire Equipment S.A.
      • Strategic Partnership
      • OEM
      • I Sense Brand
      • Commitment
      • Background
      • 2 Main Topologies
        • Conventional
        • Addressable
          • Addressable
          • Analogue Addressable
      • Fire Conditions Signaled:
        • Switch Activation
        • Current Limit
        • End of Line Monitoring
          • Resistive Capacitive
      • Digital Protocol
        • General System Status
          • Fire
          • Fault
          • Pre-Alarm
          • Maintenance
      • Each Device has an address
        • Soft Addressing
        • Hard addressing – DIL Switch, Programming Card
      • Device response corresponds to actual value of parameter being measured and not the device status.
      • Physical Layer
        • Voltage Pulses from Panel to Devices
        • Current Pulses from Devices to Panel
        • Alternative Methods
        • FSK – Frequency Shift Keying
        • Radio Frequency
      • Configuration of Devices via Loop Interface
      • More Device Types
      • Calibration
      • Sensitivity Settings
      • Stand Alone
        • Conventional Systems
        • Small Addressable Systems
      • Networked Systems
      • Applies mainly to large addressable Systems
        • High Rise Buildings
        • Multi Building Sites
        • Shopping Malls
      • Master - Slave
      • Peer – to - Peer
      • Increased System Redundancy
      • Facilitates System Layout
      • Integration to Building Management Systems
      • RS-485 – Copper
      • Fibre Optics
      • LAN - TCP/IP
      • Serial Data Transmission
      • Wire Based Half, Single and Full Duplex
      • Data Rate adaptable to distances involved between nodes and cable types used.
      • High Level of Noise Rejection
      • Maximum distances up to 1400 meters.
      • Serial Transmission
      • Higher Data Transmission Rates
      • Longer Distances between nodes:
        • Multi Mode typically up to 4 Kms
        • Mono Mode up to 20 Kms
      • Higher Noise Immunity than copper based systems.
      • Direct Integration with site’s LAN
      • Possibility of connection to WANs
      • Network can be web enabled.
      • Offers extra layer of monitoring and control.
      • Use of site’s LAN network will bring, in most cases, savings on cabling and installation
      • Commonly known as BMS
      • Propietary software for Monitoring and Control
      • Graphical PC Software
      • Integration with 3rd party software:
        • Modbus
        • Bacnet
        • etc
      • Location : Millennium Building Complex São Paulo – Brazil
      • Site Structure : 5 buildings - 5 floors per building
      • 2000 sq. Meters / floor (average)
      • Type : Business & Office Centre
      • This system has been chosen because it shows very clearly the benefits of implementing a networked system.
      • While at the same time demonstrating the consequences of not using a distributed layout.
      • The system comprises 12 loops of addressable devices and it was initially quoted as a distributed system, consisting of a single loop Main Panel and four 3-loop self contained sub-panels.
      • The network was to be RS-485 based using CAT5 UTP cable.
      • Due to financial constraints, the electrical sub-contractor insisted on a single 12 loop panel being installed in the central building which housed in its basement, a security station.
      • GFE’s Technical Department expressed reservations about this system layout and voiced their concern to the installer.
      • A system of this size based on a self contained panel was bound to create problems due to excessive loop lengths.
      • Our advice was initially not followed and installation was done as per the customer’s demands.
      • Some loops were extremely long (in excess of 2 Kms )
      • This caused permanent problems on the communication between panel and loop devices:
        • Missing devices
        • Wrong device types fitted
        • Instability on the total loop device count
        • Instability of analogue value being reported by certain devices
      • The distributed solution was the best approach.
      • Overall structure of the network - taking into account the topology of the site,:
        • 3-loop Main Panel
        • 4 Repeater Panels each with 3 loops
      • All nodes in the system would be linked using Fiber Optics.
      • Use of double redundant data loop insures communication between all nodes, even when the status of one of the data communication loops is compromised.
      • The use of Fiber Optics will also eliminate the effects of EMI, insuring integrity of data packets flowing between nodes.
      • The direct implication of this change in system topology was a drastic reduction in the maximum loop length to a more manageable length of 600 meters.
      • All faults in the system were removed and the system has been operating without any problems for the last 3 years.
      • Although the overall cost of the hardware used in this distributed layout is higher than the centralized system
      • The extra hidden costs incurred due to extra maintenance and site visits far outweigh the extra hardware cost involved on a networked system.
      • Customer’s Loss of confidence on:
        • the installer
        • equipment being employed.
      • Installation could have been further improved by splitting the system into 5 individual, 2 or 3 loop systems.
      • One system per building.
      • Linked to a centralized monitoring station
      • Using proprietary graphical software or MODBUS linked to 3rd party BMS software.