In this video I describe the basic features of a Field Charger Power Supply. I show the most common connection (in my experience) to a fire alarm panel.
Very informative video, but if a power supply had a trouble, and was reporting that to the main panel by breaking the connection to the end-of-line resistor, would it reconnect the input and output terminals, if it went into alarm, to ensure that all NAC's/FCP's after that unit were activated?
jayja45 Most manufacturers do exactly what you're asking. In the event the input to the power supply reverses polarity (goes into alarm), the contact between the input and output that previously opened to transmit a trouble will then close to allow FCPS panels down the line to all activate. I took a Silent Knight class where the instructor said their panels to not work this way. I didn't believe him and so I looked into their manual. I didn't get a clear answer from the manual. It seems they may do the same thing but I have not field tested it. Short answer: the good power supplies do exactly what you say.
Today I learned how multiple FCPS's are able to be daisy-chained together without its trouble contacts killing the downstream FCPS's. Being an inexperienced inspector helper, I confused myself into thinking the FCPS just cut power to the OUT contacts to cut power to the resistor. This makes no sense. After all, how could something called OUT be intended exclusively for an EOL resistor? Curious, I opened the manual. Turns out the trouble contact is located between IN + and OUT +. On a trouble condition, the FCPS will do its electronic magic and sever the main panel's connection to the positive leg of the outgoing circuit. The panel can now no longer see the EOLR, causing a NAC trouble. However, the FCPS's IN terminals will still be receiving power from the main panel, while its OUT terminals are still being operated by the FCPS itself. Thus, the panel can still trip the FCPS, and the FCPS can still, in turn, send power through its OUT terminals. I hope this is accurate. What I am still curious about is whether this logic applies to sync modules as well. And also whether it's good practice to have ordinary notification appliances connected to the OUT terminals - Can the FCPS still somehow distribute the panel's NAC power to the OUT terminals if the FCPS goes into trouble, or is the OUT now being powered solely by the FCPS?
A couple things here... Most of what you said is correct. It is definitely not good practice to have ordinary NAC devices connected to the trigger circuits of NAC panels. You'll see it being done, and it will usually work, but it isn't good practice. It can cause sync issues, troubleshooting headaches, etc. Most newer NAC panels will tell you in their manuals you cannot do it. Best practice is to have NAC triggers be NAC triggers and NAC circuits be NAC circuits. What you described with the IN and OUT terminals is accurate, but be careful in assuming that because it's true of one model of NAC panel that it's necessarily true of another. Silent Knight made a NAC panel that didn't close the output contact on an alarm condition, so you'd have to be aware of that when wiring multiple units. Other NAC panels have other minor differences as well, so defer to each individual manual to see how their equipment works. I think your description of the process was a good one, but I think it may be helpful for you to not think in terms of the NAC panel "powering" the OUT side of the trigger. Instead, think of the OUT side as having one leg pass through a relay where it's simply completing the circuit or opening the circuit. Whatever signal gets sent to the IN side is getting sent to the OUT, which includes sync signals. The signal is not regenerated, it's simply passed through. Sync modules work differently because they don't open up on trouble so there's no concern there. You really have to treat each product individually. As a brief tangent, the newest honeywell NAC panels make several claims in their manuals that are simply not true based on my limited experience with them so far. I think some of their wiring diagrams are incorrect, and some of their claims about what circuits open up on trouble are not true. It appears it's going to be a problem for retrofit applications, but it's a bit too complex to get into here. The last thing I'd say is if you're thinking this in-depth about NAC panels and you're still a testing apprentice or assistant, you're doing better than the majority of people in your position and should be pushing for a more independent role in your company or at another. Your description was very good and it's clear you understand what you're looking at. Keep at it.
@@JoeKlochan Thank you for your words of encouragement! I'm trying to push for full time, while absorbing as much "field smarts" as I can in the meantime. I also appreciate the advice about treating each brand individually. Your tutorials were a major factor in getting me interested in the technical aspects of fire alarm systems. Before that, I was pretty much just a kid who liked seeing things go "beep".
thank you very very much i am electrical engineer i am egyptian i hope hope hope you speak slowly i can not understand alot and i am trieng and trieng to translate to arabic excuse me can you help
Your a beast bro! I’m learning day by day even after doing fire alarm for years. I’m taking on a new position strictly FA so thank you!!!!!!
Thank you for taking the time to make this animation.
Great video!
thank you for your help, you have taught me so much!
Thank you, very useful videos.
thank you for your time
cool only documentation video I can find. can you talk about sync input in part 2
Awesome video! Can I ask what software you're using for the demonstration?
Very informative video, but if a power supply had a trouble, and was reporting that to the main panel by breaking the connection to the end-of-line resistor, would it reconnect the input and output terminals, if it went into alarm, to ensure that all NAC's/FCP's after that unit were activated?
jayja45 Most manufacturers do exactly what you're asking. In the event the input to the power supply reverses polarity (goes into alarm), the contact between the input and output that previously opened to transmit a trouble will then close to allow FCPS panels down the line to all activate. I took a Silent Knight class where the instructor said their panels to not work this way. I didn't believe him and so I looked into their manual. I didn't get a clear answer from the manual. It seems they may do the same thing but I have not field tested it. Short answer: the good power supplies do exactly what you say.
Cool thanks
Today I learned how multiple FCPS's are able to be daisy-chained together without its trouble contacts killing the downstream FCPS's.
Being an inexperienced inspector helper, I confused myself into thinking the FCPS just cut power to the OUT contacts to cut power to the resistor. This makes no sense. After all, how could something called OUT be intended exclusively for an EOL resistor?
Curious, I opened the manual. Turns out the trouble contact is located between IN + and OUT +. On a trouble condition, the FCPS will do its electronic magic and sever the main panel's connection to the positive leg of the outgoing circuit. The panel can now no longer see the EOLR, causing a NAC trouble.
However, the FCPS's IN terminals will still be receiving power from the main panel, while its OUT terminals are still being operated by the FCPS itself. Thus, the panel can still trip the FCPS, and the FCPS can still, in turn, send power through its OUT terminals.
I hope this is accurate. What I am still curious about is whether this logic applies to sync modules as well. And also whether it's good practice to have ordinary notification appliances connected to the OUT terminals - Can the FCPS still somehow distribute the panel's NAC power to the OUT terminals if the FCPS goes into trouble, or is the OUT now being powered solely by the FCPS?
A couple things here... Most of what you said is correct. It is definitely not good practice to have ordinary NAC devices connected to the trigger circuits of NAC panels. You'll see it being done, and it will usually work, but it isn't good practice. It can cause sync issues, troubleshooting headaches, etc. Most newer NAC panels will tell you in their manuals you cannot do it. Best practice is to have NAC triggers be NAC triggers and NAC circuits be NAC circuits.
What you described with the IN and OUT terminals is accurate, but be careful in assuming that because it's true of one model of NAC panel that it's necessarily true of another. Silent Knight made a NAC panel that didn't close the output contact on an alarm condition, so you'd have to be aware of that when wiring multiple units. Other NAC panels have other minor differences as well, so defer to each individual manual to see how their equipment works.
I think your description of the process was a good one, but I think it may be helpful for you to not think in terms of the NAC panel "powering" the OUT side of the trigger. Instead, think of the OUT side as having one leg pass through a relay where it's simply completing the circuit or opening the circuit. Whatever signal gets sent to the IN side is getting sent to the OUT, which includes sync signals. The signal is not regenerated, it's simply passed through.
Sync modules work differently because they don't open up on trouble so there's no concern there.
You really have to treat each product individually. As a brief tangent, the newest honeywell NAC panels make several claims in their manuals that are simply not true based on my limited experience with them so far. I think some of their wiring diagrams are incorrect, and some of their claims about what circuits open up on trouble are not true. It appears it's going to be a problem for retrofit applications, but it's a bit too complex to get into here.
The last thing I'd say is if you're thinking this in-depth about NAC panels and you're still a testing apprentice or assistant, you're doing better than the majority of people in your position and should be pushing for a more independent role in your company or at another. Your description was very good and it's clear you understand what you're looking at. Keep at it.
@@JoeKlochan Thank you for your words of encouragement! I'm trying to push for full time, while absorbing as much "field smarts" as I can in the meantime. I also appreciate the advice about treating each brand individually.
Your tutorials were a major factor in getting me interested in the technical aspects of fire alarm systems. Before that, I was pretty much just a kid who liked seeing things go "beep".
thank you very very much i am electrical engineer i am egyptian i hope hope hope you speak slowly i can not understand alot and i am trieng and trieng to translate to arabic excuse me can you help
you can also turn the videos speed down