ukoda wrote: » I have the above alarm and it has 6 zone and 6 tamper terminals. I’m looking to upgrade this to a new panel, the one I have my eye on doesn’t have tamper terminals, it just has 9 zones. Is it possible to wire the tampers into he zones or wire them all into 1 zone, or even not use the tampers at all? There’s also a “tamper return” terminal on the old board beside the Int/ext Bell terminals. From what I can tell, the tamper circuits are for the case covers of the shock sensors on all the doors / windows.
Mr. G wrote: » Just to clarify the HKC SecureWatch 610 is probably the panel you have. The next upgrade would most likely be a HKC SecureWave 1070 panel or GSD/Siemens. SecureComm is HKC's remote management offering/app. I don't think SecureComm works on the 6/10, but you can get a card for the 8/12 which is also a slightly newer (but EOL) panel. Not sure what panel you are looking at. You can wire tamper in series not parallel. Yes it's possible to combine them and just have one tamper but IMO each zone should have its own tamper, please don't combine them! Are you sure you don't have tamper terminals on each zone? Take a look at Siemens, GSD and HKC. Which panel to choose is a religious argument so have a look through this forum for discussions and comparisons.
ukoda wrote: » Yes sorry it’s the SecureWatch. The tamper terminals appear to be seperate if that’s what you mean, the panel is wired as: Z1, Z2, Z3... etc and then T1, T2, T3... etc and Zones have 2 terminals as does the Tamper
Mr. G wrote: » Yep so each zone runs it's own tamper, so you replicate this in the new panel. The 6/10 has tampers so it's the same config. Every zone should have a tamper always!
ukoda wrote: » The panel I want doesn’t have tampers, just 9 zones, is there a way to wire it in or is it just not compatible and I need a panel with tampers?
Mr. G wrote: » What panel are you looking at? Get a panel that has individual tampers for each zone. You should find one that is suitable for EN50131.
Mr. G wrote: » Couldn't you go for a hybrid panel? What is your plan and what is it you need to do?
KoolKid wrote: » You can probably wire the zones using duel end of line resistors to give you separate tampers for each zone.
KoolKid wrote: » You would need to look at the how the zones can be configured in the panel programming. If there is a option for Duel end of line wiring then tampers and alarm can be wired onto a single zone input.
KoolKid wrote: » If there is no option for Duel end of line then you will need to series all tampers into an aux tamper input.
KoolKid wrote: » I think you would be better off upgrading to another system. Siemens Vanderbilt or GSDs i1070 would be my recommendations.
KoolKid wrote: » To be honest for serious home automation I think you are better off using a dedicated system away from the alarm. After that Siemens Vanderbilt will give you some good control using outputs, virtual outputs and X10.
KoolKid wrote: » Can you explain how you want or would like the alarm to integrate? I think Google and some other systems have an option to hardwire triggers from the alarm panel etc.
KoolKid wrote: » Siemens Vanderbilt could do a lot of that but it would be talking to the end devices & not your central control system. Some examples I have set up. If alarm is set turn off heating. If alarm is part set turn off heating after 20 minutes. If so many perimeter zones are open turn off heating. If alarm is activated turn on certain lights. If hall door is opened dusk-dawn turn on hall lights If back door is opened dusk-dawn switch back external lights. Conditions can be controlled by calendar,inputs, outputs user codes/fobs or any combination of all.
kub wrote: » I hope you do not have inertia shock sensors on your existing 6/10. Because these will not work on the Honeywell panel you are considering
ukoda wrote: I think I do, it’s what I assume this is:
kub wrote: » Ok you do, but that sensor head is fitted incorrectly so won't work anyway.
ukoda wrote: Btw are you familiar with that panel or can you just tell form the diagram?
ukoda wrote: I could always bypass these and just have the zones using the contacts