Re: Dammit.. How to get 2 zones and power from a 4-conductor

["Roland" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Vista 15-P

Zone Doubling is on the (V20P only)
This feature provides two hardwired normally closed zones for each standard
hardwired zone connected to the control's terminals (but does not increase
the total
number of zones supported by the control). If enabled (Zone Programming
mode,
"Hardwire Type" prompt, option "3"), hardwire zones are automatically paired
as
shown in the table. Connect as shown below (resistors provided).
. Do not use zone doubling for fire zones.
NOTE: A short across the EOL (i.e., at terminal) on either zone of a
zone-doubled
pair or on a double-balanced zone causes a tamper condition (displayed as
CHECK plus
zone numbers).
Zone Doubling Table
Zone Paired with zone
2 10
3 11
4 12
5 13
6 14
7 15
8 16


It looks like you might have to swap panels and upgrade (well it's Ademco so
it's never really an upgrade) to a 20P to get the feature you want without
extra wiring.
If you switch to a DSC 1832 (about the same money for the kit - not much
better or worse gear than Honeywell/Ademco) you can use the:
Zone Status - Loop Resistance/Loop Status
. Fault - 0? (shorted wire/loop)
. Secure - 5600? (contact closed)
. Tamper - infinite (broken wire, open)
. Violated - 11,200? (contact open)


"Nelson Muntz" <none@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4nkf23lvne1rma3d1hqkpc7513b7ljas6o@xxxxxxxxxx
> So I just finished this job with 5 home-run motions to the CP.  As I
> was doing training I told him about the tamper switches on the motions
> IS25100TC (front and back) that I wired in series with the alarm
> contacts.  He thought that was great - then added, "so I'll be able to
> know right away when someone knocks the thing off the wall, right?".
> Of course the answer is 'no'.  I never planned on putting the tampers
> on a separate 24 hour zone - otherwise I would have run 6 conductor.
> Now he wants that "feature", and the trick for sharing a 'common' wire
> for power and zone won't work as far as I can tell.  Am I correct, or
> is there a way to do it without running more wire?
>