Automatic Fire Loop Addressing via Unique Identifier Arrays

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing fire alarm systems face challenges in efficiently and accurately addressing multiple remote units in a fire loop, particularly in large installations, due to the complexity and risk of human error in manual addressing methods and the inefficiency of conventional automatic addressing systems.

Innovation Solution

An automatic addressing system where the fire panel requests initial and further identifiers from remote units, assigns unique addresses based on unique identifiers, and silences responses to enable communication, reducing installation time and error by using a probabilistic approach to ensure unique addressing of remote units.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If manual addressing methods are used to assign unique addresses to remote units, then addressing accuracy can be maintained, but installation time increases significantly and human error risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaddressing accuracyVSAvoidinstallation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The remote units automatically generate and provide their own unique identifiers in response to polling signals from the fire panel, eliminating the need for manual addressing. Each remote unit autonomously participates in the addressing process by responding to identifier requests, thereby reducing installation time while maintaining accuracy through the systematic collection of unique identifiers.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The fire panel polls remote units and receives feedback in the form of unique identifiers. Based on this feedback, the system determines whether identifiers are unique or duplicated and takes appropriate actions (assigning addresses or requesting further identifiers). This feedback mechanism ensures addressing accuracy while automating the process to reduce installation time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Loss of time

If conventional automatic addressing systems are used, then installation time is reduced, but the complexity increases and human error risk remains

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinstallation timeVSAvoidaddressing system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The addressing process is segmented into distinct phases: initial identifier request, uniqueness verification, address assignment, and silencing. This segmentation simplifies the overall complexity by breaking down the automatic addressing into manageable, systematic steps that reduce errors while maintaining efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Unique identifiers serve as intermediaries between the fire panel and remote units during the addressing process. These identifiers facilitate automatic address assignment without requiring complex manual configuration, thereby reducing installation time while keeping the system manageable through a clear, stepwise procedure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Measurement precision

If manual addressing is performed, then addressing accuracy can be ensured, but the risk of human error increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaddressing accuracyVSAvoiderror risk
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

Remote units autonomously provide their unique identifiers in response to polling signals, eliminating manual intervention and the associated human errors. This self-service approach ensures addressing accuracy while improving reliability by removing the human element from the addressing process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously polls remote units and receives feedback on identifier uniqueness. Based on this feedback, the fire panel automatically determines the next action (assign address or request further identifier), ensuring accuracy and reliability through a closed-loop process that eliminates manual errors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Productivity

If automatic addressing is implemented, then installation efficiency improves, but handling large numbers of remote units becomes problematic

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinstallation efficiencyVSAvoidcomplexity in large installations
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The addressing process is divided into systematic phases (identifier request, uniqueness check, address assignment, silencing) that can be efficiently executed regardless of the number of remote units. This segmentation maintains installation efficiency in large systems by providing a scalable, stepwise approach that prevents complexity from overwhelming the process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The fire panel continuously polls remote units and processes identifier responses in real-time, maintaining continuous useful action throughout the addressing process. This continuous operation ensures high installation efficiency even with large numbers of remote units, as the system systematically progresses through each unit without interruption or manual intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Data Source

PatentEP4160566B1Automatic addressing for fire loop
Publication Date: 2024.07.31 CARRIER CORP
  • EP4160566B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4160566B1 patent drawingFigure 2

AI summary

The present invention relates to an automatic addressing system for a fire loop and to a related method for automatically addressing a plurality of remote units electrically connected to a fire panel in a fire loop, the method comprising: (1) requesting an initial identifier from each remote unit; (2) for each remote unit which responds with a unique initial identifier: (a) assigning a unique address to the remote unit; and (b) silencing the response of the configured remote unit to further identifier requests; (3) for each remote unit which responds with an initial identifier matching the initial identifier of at least one other remote unit: (a) initialising an identifier array with the initial identifier for the remote unit in question; (b) requesting a further identifier and adding it to the identifier array for the remote unit; (c) for each remote unit which responds with a unique identifier array: (i) assigning a unique address to the remote unit; and (ii) silencing the response of the configured remote unit to further identifier requests; (d) for each remote unit which responds with an identifier array matching the identifier array of at least one other remote unit, repeating steps (3)(b)-(c) until all remote units of the plurality of remote units have been silenced; and (4) enabling communication of the plurality of remote units in the fire loop.