Tamper Alarm on 6 Detectors After Battery Replacement & Removal - Satel Integra 64 System

I will write immediately that I am a layman in the subject of alarm installations.

We have an alarm system built by a supposedly professional installer. The problem appeared when one wireless detector started to fall - we had to replace the battery every 2 weeks, and the problem with it was causing the alarm system to activate. I was surprised that I can easily turn off this detector without triggering a tamper alarm ...

Another problem - when we had to remove the detector (room reconstruction) - due to the fact that the installer did not show up for more than 3 weeks - the detector was simply cut off.

Due to the fact that we also had to change the entry delay time at a specific detector - we installed dloadx. In the system, we only changed the time on these detectors, and removed the wireless detector and the 2 that was cut off.

After shutting down the system - it reloaded and ... old problems disappeared. But there was a tamper alarm on 6 other detectors. Only what I could say is that they are all on the same expander (only 1 detector on this expander does not indicate a problem).

I wonder what happened - we want to call another specialist, but I would like to know at least in general - whether the fault may lie, for example, in the installation itself (e.g. the detectors had previously disabled this tamper alarm).

Thank you in advance for your time and answers

I assume that the wireless is an ABAX system. It should be remembered here that after adding / removing detectors, expanders identification should be performed. In addition, the detector was previously reliably programmed as 2EOL / NC. If the detector is no longer present, and thus does not occupy a zone in the system, then this zone should be set differently - e.g. as no detector.

Tamper from several zones simultaneously may be a sign that the order of the expanders has changed and that now the 2EOL / NC zones are not "guarded" in the system. This should be verified - i.e. what positions the detectors occupy on the list of ABAX devices and what positions they occupy on the control panel zones (Zones window).

the location of the wireless detector is set as no detector. Neither they feel nor the wired one removed from the system is no longer a problem.

Those detectors that are now "sending" the problem are the wires. Importantly, the same cable was "attached" to the same expander, which had been removed and its place was removed from the system - maybe this is the problem.

dariusz.bembenek wrote:

I assume that the wireless is an ABAX system. It should be remembered here that after adding / removing detectors, expanders identification should be performed. In addition, the detector was previously reliably programmed as 2EOL / NC. If the detector is no longer present, and thus does not occupy a zone in the system, then this zone should be set differently - e.g. as no detector.

Tamper from several zones simultaneously may be a sign that the order of the expanders has changed and that now the 2EOL / NC zones are not "guarded" in the system. This should be verified - i.e. what positions the detectors occupy on the list of ABAX devices and what positions they occupy on the control panel zones (Zones window).

Then the topic is easy to diagnose:
It is not a detector that indicates tamper, but a specific control panel zone (specific zone). Check how this input is configured and what is currently connected to it. I know that nothing had to be buried at the wired inputs (by the cables), but due to tampering with the wireless detectors (removing them), the position of the expanders could be changed (details after reading the ABAX documentation). Therefore, it is necessary to review the system configuration and the physical connections of the detectors, whether they match each other.

Considering that we have several dozen detectors in the system and only 6 report a problem (connected after the expander with the former wired detector) - can I limit myself to diagnosing only this expander and these detectors?

best regards

dariusz.bembenek wrote:

Then the topic is easy to diagnose:
It is not a detector that indicates tamper, but a specific control panel zone (specific zone). Check how this input is configured and what is currently connected to it. I know that nothing had to be buried at the wired inputs (by the cables), but due to tampering with the wireless detectors (removing them), the position of the expanders could be changed (details after reading the ABAX documentation). Therefore, it is necessary to review the system configuration and the physical connections of the detectors, whether they match each other.

Without knowing the connections of the elements and the current configuration, I cannot say anything specific. We know nothing about this installation, about connecting the detectors (whether they are connected as EOL / 2EOL / etc.).
I will write it differently:
- since the system "throws" a tamper alarm, it is probably not an alarm that comes from nowhere. It comes from specific lines. Now your opinion is to check what is attached to these lines and how. This data will help pinpoint the cause of the sabotage.

I am thinking of a simple test - if the zones were changed, or, for example, after activating an alarm and entering a given detector, the system will not show it incorrectly. Ie if e.g. in the system the given detector was previously described as X - now it will be shown as, for example, Y.

Added after 51 [minutes]:

I checked the dloadx program again - 99% of the outputs were mixed up. It is visible in the event logs - the former input was violated X, now it's Y. I have 5 elements. Acu-100 is a wireless detector removed. Would I have to reprogram everything to restore the correct system?

https://obrazki.elektroda.pl/7582213000_1485356001.jpg

In the quoted configuration window (DloadX -> Structure -> Hardware -> Expanders) there is the "Order of expanders" button. Here, you can make changes and "rearrange" the order of items (zones / outputs) taken up by expanders.

The change will be valid until the next identification. Then it will diverge again. Therefore, it is worthwhile to provide the range of zones in the names of expanders, e.g.
"I17-24" - the expander of inputs (I = input) from 17 to 24. If it ever goes out, you will know what position to set it to.

I looked at this function in order and I have something like this, I do not know if the numbers in front of the expanders are numbering assigned by the installer or by the program.

https://obrazki.elektroda.pl/1328223400_1485423001.jpg

Importantly, in the expander structure itself, there is also the acu-100 on which this wireless detector was installed.



The input that was possibly assigned to this acu-100 is now in another expander this 17 ...

Maybe there is a problem here?

best regards

Of course there is a problem here. You can move the expanders manually. I have already written about it.
Previously, there was one detector in the ACU, but in line with ABAX's philosophy, it took one address (8 zones). Now the detector is gone and the ACU does not occupy this address anymore, therefore the next expanders have moved up by 1 address. The order should be changed.

If I upload a new wireless detector to the acu (I see that a new device can be added to the acu-100) will everything return to normal? How to rearrange the order of expanders as the acu-100 is not available?
Added after 6 [minutes]:
or should I change "no module" to place 2 where the acu-100 was?

Yes - positions are adjusted with arrows. It has to be "no module". This is obviously a temporary solution. After adding the detector (and identifying the expanders), everything should return to normal.

By the way - have you checked where these sensors are powered from?

I added a wireless detector to the system so far I have set it as "no detector" - the technical failure of 6 detectors has disappeared No. 41-48 has disappeared. 2 others appeared, next in sequence. At the moment I set them as no detectors and the system is clean. I wonder if this wireless detector can take up more or less space. After some reloading, the dloadx also triggered a fire alarm in one of the next detectors :)

Is it possible to test, without activating the system, whether the detectors will be indicated as appropriate by the system?

I patch it all up so shortly - we are now looking for a new and good service from satellite ...

DloadX -> Communication -> System status -> Input status

Violating the detectors will light the appropriate "circles" in green. If there is an ABAX detector, the lighting of the circle may be delayed by 12, 24 or 36 seconds. It is related to the so-called the polling period. During the vigil, there are no delays in sending information about violations.

Checked - everything is ok, except for 2 smoke detectors, which are also green and previously signaled a fire. I do not know if smoke detectors should glow like this.

It is a pity, Dariusz, that you are from Olkusz, because I would not be looking for a new service technician.

dariusz.bembenek wrote:

DloadX -> Communication -> System status -> Input status

Violating the detectors will light the appropriate "circles" in green. If there is an ABAX detector, the lighting of the circle may be delayed by 12, 24 or 36 seconds. It is related to the so-called the polling period. During the vigil, there are no delays in sending information about violations.

In the program, only those zones that are currently violated are lit in green. So if the smoke detectors "light up", it means that they are currently violated - which is bad. Perhaps:
- detectors are not clean inside either
- there is smoke either
- the configuration of inputs is still badly matched with the real state of connected devices.

krzysiu966 wrote:

The problem arose when one wireless detector started to fall - we had to replace the battery every 2 weeks, and the problem with it caused the alarm system to activate

Are you not puzzled by this incident? Perhaps it is not a problem with the sensor and the battery, but with the AKU-100 module.
Of course, the colleagues above advise well ... but I would focus on the first problem that arose in the system.
I would start with physically unplugging the ACU-100 module and identifying the expanders. to diagnose whether a damaged AKU-100 module "does not work" in the system ...