Fire Detection Layout and Loop Wiring for Automated Commissioning

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional building fire detection systems require manual design, installation, and commissioning, which are costly and time-consuming, with existing technologies lacking efficient automated design and configuration methods.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method and system for designing fire detection systems that automatically determine fire detection device and alert device placement, loop wire connections, and panel configurations based on user inputs and databases, generating a map and testing the configuration for accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual design, installation, and commissioning methods are used for fire detection systems, then system reliability and compliance can be ensured through human expertise, but the process becomes costly and time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem complianceVSAvoiddesign and installation time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The fire detection system performs self-configuration and self-commissioning through automated processes. The controller automatically configures system parameters, associates devices with monitoring zones, and validates installations without requiring manual commissioning by professionals, thereby reducing time and cost while maintaining reliability through programmed compliance rules

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system pre-configures detection devices and alert devices with necessary parameters and associations during the design phase before actual installation. Device placements, zone associations, and system parameters are predetermined through automated design software, eliminating the need for manual configuration during commissioning

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If manual design and configuration methods are used, then complex system requirements and regulations can be addressed through expert knowledge, but the overall system cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveregulation complianceVSAvoidsystem cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The automated system performs self-configuration and self-validation against regulatory requirements. The controller automatically checks compliance with safety standards and building codes during the configuration process, eliminating the need for expensive manual commissioning services while ensuring regulation adherence through programmed compliance rules

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Manual expert knowledge and commissioning processes are replaced with automated electronic systems. The controller uses embedded software to perform configuration, validation, and compliance checking that previously required human experts, thereby reducing labor costs while maintaining or improving compliance accuracy

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If automated design systems are implemented, then design time and cost are reduced, but the complexity of system configuration and association increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedesign efficiencyVSAvoidconfiguration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The controller automatically performs complex configuration tasks including device associations, parameter settings, and zone mappings without user intervention. The system self-configures based on automated design outputs, transforming complex configuration processes into automated electronic operations that increase productivity without requiring user expertise

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Loss of time

If automatic association between alert devices and detection devices is implemented, then commissioning time is reduced, but the risk of incorrect configuration increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecommissioning timeVSAvoidconfiguration accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements automated testing and validation feedback loops. After automatic association of alert devices with detection devices, the system performs functional tests to verify correct operation. The controller monitors system responses and validates configurations, providing feedback that confirms proper association or identifies errors that need correction

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary validation and testing of automatic associations before final system activation. Configuration accuracy is verified through automated checks and functional tests conducted during the commissioning phase, ensuring that automatic associations are correct before the system enters operational mode

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP4184469B1Automatic configuration of fire system
Publication Date: 2026.01.28 CARRIER CORP
  • EP4184469B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4184469B1 patent drawingFigure 2

AI summary

A computer implemented method (600) of designing a fire detection system (20) including determining (604) a fire detection device placement scheme (140a) for one or more fire detection devices (30) within a building (62) based on inputs (110) received from a user (101) and a fire detection device database (150a); determining (606) an alert device placement scheme (140b) for one or more alert devices (50) within the building (62) based on the inputs (110) received from the user (101) and an alert device database (150b); determining (608) one or more fire detector loop wires (40) to connect the one or more fire detection devices (30) to a fire panel (54) in a fire detection loop (32); determining (610) one or more alert loop wires (42) to connect the one or more alert devices (50) to the fire panel in an alert loop (52); and generating a map (60) that displays a location of each of the fire detection devices (30), the alert devices (50), the fire detector loop wires (40), and the alert loop wires (42) within the building (62).