Napco MA3000 - Dialer Test on both Lines?

Does anyone know how to get the MA3000 to send a daily test signal, as required by NFPA, on both phone lines. No problem sending test on telco 1, just don't know how to make it test on telco 2. On our commercial fire alarms, each line calls into a different account number and different receiver for each line. We get no test on the second line. Thanks, Allan

Reply to
Allan Waghalter
Loading thread data ...

Can you program openings and closings to dial on the second line? If so, set up an auto-arm-auto-disarm window for the same time every day. This should satisfy your "test" transmission requirements.

Reply to
Frank Olson

Reply to
Allan Waghalter

The CF5530 two line module for the Napco MA3000 selects the best working line of the two connected to it to dial out on. You cannot dictate which of these is to be used for a test. You can, however, program the system to send a test to a second phone number by programming the test to be sent to 1 and 3. This will test the second central station line, but not the second phone line connected to the panel. The panel automatically reports a problem with either phone should one have failed or has a problem.

Reply to
Allan Waghalter

Allan,

You could set up a programmable Napco relay to interrupt phone line 1 from the panel, then run the test report.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

I think the bigger issue here is that the Napco equipment must meet all the UL requirements to be listed. If UL requires test signals generated from "line 2", then Napco is obligated to provide this to maintain their UL listing. Besides, the "daily test" can't be duplicated. All the ULC communicators I work with have provision for only one daily test report, and that's typically on the primary line.

Reply to
Frank Olson

I think the NFPA 72 requirement is that the system alternates its daily test between the two lines.

Doug

Reply to
Doug L

My copy of NFPA 71 doesn't mention that. It only states that "each DACT shall automatically initiate and complete a test signal transmission sequence to its associated DACR at least once every 24 hours." AFAIK that remains the only requirement other than the one that states that failure of a telephone line shall be annunciated locally and transmitted to the DACR within 4 minutes on the second (backup) line.

Reply to
Frank Olson

Allan:

Unless the AHJ wants something "out of the ordinary", UL's requirements mirror NFPA 71. I've just checked the latest edition and there's no actual requirement for performing a 24 hour test transmission on the back-up line. Check my response to DougL.

Reply to
Frank Olson

Installing a device that could compromise the phone connection isn't the smartest thing to do

Reply to
Mark Leuck

It sure took you long enough to spot yet another great piece of "advice" from someone that's obviously never installed a UL listed fire alarm communicator and is unfamiliar with the code requirements. And he sells full blown fire alarm systems... to DIYer's... scary.

Reply to
Frank Olson

God damn Canadians! :-) Stick to your Canadian standards!

First of all, NFPA 71 no longer exists. It hasn't for a lot of years now. The National Fire Alarm Code (in the US) is NFPA 72.

Refer to 8.5.3.2.1.4 in the 2002 edition, and you will find the following:

(B) The following requirements shall apply to all combinations [of transmission channels] listed in 8.5.3.2.1.4(A):

(1) Both channels shall be supervised in a manner approved for the means of transmission employed,

(2) Both channels shall be tested at intervals not exceeding 24 hours.

Exception No. 2: Where two telephone lines (numbers) are used, it shall be permitted to test each telephone line (number) at alternating 24-hour intervals.

(3) The failure of either channel shall send a trouble signal on the other channel within 4 minutes.

I believe that requirement was added at some point, perhaps after this Napco panel received its UL listing. In which case, this requirement is not retroactive for existing systems. However, a newly installed system would have to comply, and if the panel is incapable of doing so, I would say it cannot be used on a new install.

- badenov

Reply to
Nomen Nescio

This was a requirement that first appeared in the 1996 NFPA 72 edition to be effective June 1998

NFPA 72-1996 Section 4-5.3.2.1.6.2

NFPA 72-1999 Section 5-5.3.2.1.6.2

state that both channels shall be tested at intervals not exceeding 24 hours with an exception that if two lines (numbers) are used it shall be permitted to test each line (number) at alternating 24-hour intervals

Unless the requirement has been removed in later editions, I believe you will find that it is required for the 24 hour test to alternate between the two lines or test both lines every 24 hours.

Doug

Reply to
Doug L

Done right the phone connection isn't compromised. Not tested at all, the phone connection might in fact be compromised and you wouldn't even know about it.

Then again, you wouldn't be able to judge what is smart.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

And with this comment I know they must have removed the wrong lobe.

Reply to
Frank Olson

That has got to be the most dangerous and fuckwitted advice you have ever offered.

He called you out.

-G

Reply to
G. Morgan

Perhaps you could now explain how this is done

The customer would have to manually test the second line, while it isn't the best thing to do it's far better than a jury-rigged relay. `Try explaining your relay testing system sometime to a fire marshall and see what he thinks as he tags the system

Reply to
Mark Leuck

Robert's the only person I know that would defend his own mistake to the last (and hurl insults at the individual that happens to point it out).

Reply to
Frank Olson

When I have the energy to do so I'll post a small jpg.

One of the reasons systems are often required to do automatic tests is that customers simply do not test anything on a regular basis.

Not even close.

I think you mean jerry rigged. However, there's nothing unusual about the technique.

Actually, I have done that several times but only while the systems were being approved.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

It may not be exactly Kosher, but it is very creative and original and does force the panel to communicate via the second phone line! Allan

Reply to
Allan Waghalter

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.