Fire Alarm System Types

Notifying Systems

Municipal Fire Alarm System

A system of alarm initiating devices, receiving equipment, and connecting circuits (other
than a public telephone network) used to transmit alarms from street locations to the
public fire service communications center.

Public Fire Alarm Reporting System

A system of fire alarm-initiating devices, receiving equipment, and connecting circuits

used to transmit alarms from street locations to the communications center.

Type A Public Alarm Reporting System

The alarm from a street location is received in a control room and transmitted either
manually or automatically to a fire station.

Type B Public Alarm Reporting System

The alarm from a street location is transmitted directly to fire stations and , if used, is
transmitted to supplementary alerting devices.

Auxiliary Systems
Auxiliary Fire Alarm System

A system connected to a municipal fire alarm system for transmitting an alarm of fire to
the public fire service communications center. Fire alarms from an auxiliary fire alarm
system are received a the public fire service communications center on the same
equipment and by the same methods as alarms transmitted manually from the municipal
fire alarm boxes located on streets.

Local Energy Type Auxiliary Fire Alarm System

An auxiliary system that employs a locally complete arrangement of parts, initiating

devices, relays, power supply, and associated components to automatically trip municipal
transmitter or master box over electrical circuits that are electrically isolated from the
municipal system circuits.

Shunt Auxiliary Type Auxiliary Fire Alarm System

An auxiliary system electrically connected to an integral part of the municipal alarm

system extending the municipal circuit into the protected premises to interconnect the
initiating devices, which, when operated, open the municipal circuit shunted around the
trip coil of the municipal transmitter or master box. The municipal transmitter or master
box is there upon energized to start transmission without any assistance from the local
source of power.

Central Station Fire Alarm System

A system or group of systems in which the operations of circuits and devices are
transmitted automatically to, recorded in, maintained by, and supervised from a listed
central station that has competent and experienced servers and operators who, upon
receipt of a signal, take such action as required by this code. Such service is to be
controlled and operated by a person, firm, or corporation whose business is the
furnishing, maintaining, or monitoring of supervised fire alarm systems.

Combination System

A fire alarm system in which the components are used, in whole or in part, in common
with a non-fire signaling system.

Non- notifying Systems

These systems notify only building occupants and do transmit alarm status to a
municipality, central station of fire station automatically.

Household Fire Alarm System

A system of devices that uses a fire alarm control unit (panel) to produce an alarm signal
in the household for the purpose of notifying the occupants of the presence of a fire so
that they will evacuate the premises.
Note: Standard smoke detectors without a fire alarm control panel are not covered
by this definition.
Proprietary Supervising Station Fire Alarm System

An installation of fire alarm systems that serves contiguous and noncontiguous

properties, under one ownership, from a proprietary supervising station located at the
protected property, or at one of multiple non-contiguous protected properties, at which
trained, competent personnel are in constant attendance. This includes the proprietary
supervising station, power supplies, signal-initiating devices, initiating device circuits,
signal notification appliances, equipment for the automatic, permanent visual recording
of signals, and equipment for initiating the operation of emergency building control
services.

Protected Premises (Local) Fire Alarm System

A protected premises system that sounds an alarm at the protected premises as the result
of the manual operation of a fire alarm box or the operation if protection equipment or
systems, such as water flowing in a sprinkler system, the discharge of carbon dioxide, the
detection of smoke, or the detection of heat.

Remote Supervising Station Fire Alarm Systems

A system installed in accordance with this code to transmit alarm, supervisory, and
trouble signals from one or more protected premises to a remote location where
appropriate action is taken.

Supplemental Data for Better Understanding

Boston’s Municipal Fire Alarm System: The Beginning of
Something Great

The fire alarm telegraph system of Boston was revolutionary when it was built over 150
years ago. It was the first fire alarm system and became the model for other American
cities to follow. The original system design principles were brilliant and pervasive.
Although the design was continuously refined over time, the principles remained
essentially unchanged, forming the basis for today’s public fire alarm systems. Many of
the original concepts evolved into national fire alarm standards which were adopted by
the NFPA - National Fire Protection Association.
Key Players

There are two key players associated with the development of this municipal fire alarm
telegraph system, William Channing and Moses Farmer. Channing reminds me of Steve
Job, founder of Apple Computer; Farmer is like Steve Wosniak, Apple’s pioneer
hardware guru.
William Channing was born in Boston on February 22, 1820. His father was a prominent
and influential Unitarian minister. He died February 22, 1901, on his eighty-first
birthday. He went to Harvard and graduated from the medical school of the University of
Pennsylvania with a medical degree. He never practiced that profession, presumably
finding electricity more rewarding.
Moses G Farmer was an electrical engineer who became a prolific inventor of great
ability. He was born on February 2, 1820 at Boscawen, New Hampshire. His father was a
farmer and prosperous lumber merchant. He died at Chicago while attending the World’s
Fair, May 2, 1893. Moses was educated at Philips Academy and Dartmouth College. He
worked as a telegraph operator, as superintendent of a telegraph company, and as teacher.
He invented an electrical bell striking machine used in Boston’s system. He also invented
some of the early Boston instruments, such as the automatic testing clock. He was a
member of the AIEE, predecessor of the IEEE.

Conditions Before 1845

To appreciate and understand the significance of this nomination, go back 150 years and
put yourself in the shoes of William Channing. He recognized how poorly Boston
responded to fire emergencies. Bell-ringers ran to their assigned church steeple, firemen
with their engines ran wildly about the streets, and citizens panicked.
Stephanie Schorow, in her new book entitled Boston on Fire, captures the scene of
frustration, chaos and confusion during a breakout of a fire:
“From colonial days to the early 19th century Bostonian knew that the best defense
against a fire was getting on the scene as quickly as possible to halt its spread. People
shook wooden rattles or simply called for help, something referred as “hallooing a fire.”
Citizens - and later volunteer firefighters – would respond by grabbing axes, buckets,
ladders and other gear and race towards the direction of the halooing. A fire foreman
leading the charge might use a speaking trumpet to bark directions; eventually trumpets
became the very symbol of firefighting and a silver trumpet was often a fitting reward for
a deserving firefighter.”
The mayor of Boston summarized the existing fire alarm problem this way:
…” the old method of communicating alarm was very imperfect, arising from the fact
that an alarm being given by ringing one bell at the northerly part of the city would
frequently, in consequence to the wind or other causes, be first heard at South Boston, or
at the extreme South End, and it was impossible to say which of several bells struck the
first alarm. There was no possible way of communicating to the ringers of these several
bells where the alarm originated, or the fire existed. The engines, therefore, were rushed
out of their houses at random, without any direction or knowledge as to the fire unless it
was an extensive conflagration and would show itself; the result of which was that the
fire made great headway, and there was great destruction of property, in consequence of
this delay of the arrival of the engines.” …. Mr. Wightman’s testimony. Reference 6.
Channing understood the basic principal of fire fighting which was simply this – get to
the fire quickly before the fire breaks out and spreads. Everybody understood this, even
playwright William Shakespeare: “A little fire is quickly trodden out. Which, being
suffered, rivers cannot quench.” ..Henry VI pt.3

Channing’s Landmark Article

In 1845, Channing presented his vision for a better way of dealing with fire emergencies
to a local newspaper. The article described his systems engineering approach to the
problem which involved better communication, better coordination, with centralized
control. Systems engineering is a branch of engineering concerned with the development
of large and complex systems, where a system is understood to be an assembly or
combination of interrelated parts working together toward a common objective. Although
not large or complex by today’s standards, Channing did address something big and new.
This article is worth studying because of its powerful functional requirements, and
brilliant solution to the fire alarm problem. We’ve transcribed the entire article and
highlighted important parts in the next paragraphs. The article was entitled “Morse’s
Telegraph for Fire Alarms” and appeared on page two of the Boston Advertiser and
Patriot, June 3, 1845:
There is a highly important application of the Electro-Magnetic Telegraph in which
public attention has not as yet been directed. This is its use in our cities to give an
instantaneous, universal and definite alarm in case of fire. The peculiar properties of the
Telegraph – rapidity and precision of communications - are in this instance pre-
eminently needed. Almost all cities, except Boston, have felt the necessity of maturing,
to some extent, signals indicating the existence and direction of a fire. In this city there
has been great negligence in this respect, and the result is that our engines are sometimes
obliged to run wildly about the streets and return home without reaching the place to
which they should have been directed. But even in New York and Philadelphia, where
some plans have been taken by means of the peculiar tolling of the bells to indicate the
direction of a fire, an alarm is communicated slowly and uncertainly.
By a very simple application of the Electro-Magnetic Telegraph, those evils may be
avoided, and the means obtained of giving immediate and precise information throughout
the city on any alarm. Let there be a central office in one of the public buildings, from
which shall proceed a double wire, passing over the top of the houses successively, to
every engine house and fire bell in the city, and returning again to complete its
circuit, to the place where it started. In each engine house or other station, thus created,
let there be one of Morse’s registers, recording permanently any impressions
communicated to the wire, and giving at the same time a sufficient warning or
alarm. Let there also be a key in each station, by the simple depression of which, the
appropriate signal will be mechanically communicated on the wire, and sent
simultaneously and without time to every other station in the circuit. The telegraph
system being thus established, on the occurrence of a fire, information would be
carried at once to the nearest station, and the intelligence would then be instantly
known throughout the city by means of the simplest mechanical signal.
Instead of having a single great circuit, it would be an easy modification of this
arrangement to have five or six circuits, proceeding each to different districts of the city,
and each ……..(newspaper is not legible at this point) ………. from the central office to
each station. To allow communication backwards and forwards from a number of
stations, two small galvanic batteries alone would be needed, and these would be
naturally placed at the central office.
The agent at this office would have it in his power to communicate directions to all
the stations, and every alarm of fire might be made to pass through the central
office before being communicated to the stations generally. There is indeed no end to
the useful modifications of which this design is susceptible. There is, however, one which
deserves to be especially mentioned. By a slight change of the arrangement at the alarm
bell stations, and an increase of machinery, the hammers of the bells could all be disposed
so as to strike mechanically on the communication of a galvanic impulse from the central
office. The agent would therefore be enabled, by depressing a single key with his
finger at certain intervals, to ring out an alarm, defining the position of the fire,
simultaneously on every church bell in the city. By combining this system of alarm
with the more precise one previously given, there would be hardly anything left to wish
for.
My object has only been by giving the details of such an arrangement, to show to every
scientific man it’s practicality and simplicity. It’s first expense would be but a few
hundred dollars, hardly reaching to thousands, which would be saved probably during the
first month of it’s operations. The chief objection to it would be the danger of the
interference of mischievous individuals with the wiring passing over the houses. In
New York and Washington, however where wires are similarly placed, no such difficulty
has occurred. They could moreover be protected by law, and a number of circuits be
employed, taking different routes, by which it would be impossible to intercept the
whole. Supposing this last however to be affected, we should still be left in no worse
condition then at the present.
I suggest this project to the consideration of the authorities of the city, on this account
especially, that Boston has been and is entirely behind hand in her arrangements for
spreading alarms of fire, and would thus have an opportunity of retrieving her character,
by taking a step in advance of other cities.
The landmark article was signed simply with the letter C.
What was going through his head as he wrote this? Is it really far fetched to say that
Channing had a vision of today’s modern public fire service communications system - the
911 emergency system?
Channing saw the telegraph as a way to bring information about fires to the brain of the
city, which he called the central office. He believed the conventional Morse’s telegraph
was linear, a way to bring intelligence in a straight line between two points, A and B. The
municipal telegraph system he envisioned was different. Not only would it be owned and
operated by the municipality, but the system would be two dimensional, encompassing
the entire town with telegraph keys distributed throughout, providing coverage across a
wide area.
I was most interested in reading about Channing’s strong functional requirements, and his
unwavering design principles. Perhaps that may explain why his ideas worked for so
long, over 150 years. His important ideas were:
1. that there be instantaneous, universal and definite alarms. Universal meant general
purpose or wide spread; definite meant trustworthy, dependable or certain.
2. that there be rapid and precise communications.
3. that there be a central office from which double or redundant wires would depart
from, then daisy chain from station to station, finally looping back to central
office to complete the circuit.
4. a telegraph key for each alarm station, whereby by simply depressing the key, you
send the appropriate signal to every station in the circuit. Channing uses the word
‘mechanically’ meaning that code signals are sent by turning a crank of some sort,
not by keying lengthy telegraphic coded messages.
5. an agent, an operator, is designated to communicate, control, or coordinate the fire
department’s response to fire emergencies.
6. information about an incident of fire is transmitted system wide.
7. aware of human nature, he proposes that there be a permanent record for each
alarm.
8. system design is flexible to accommodate different circuit arrangement.
9. by depressing a single key, the agent rings out a general alarm defining the
position of the fire simultaneously on every church bell in the city.
10. touches briefly on reliability or security issues, a major concern since circuits
would be vulnerable over rooftops and strung out on poles.
History does not document what led to Channing’s interests and obsessions. Presumably
he personally witnessed the breakout of fire in his neighborhood. Being a real innovator,
William Channing spent a lot of time refining his ideas based on the application of
Morse’s telegraph. Not only was he first to conceive of a complete fire alarm system, but
by 1851 he was determined to see his ideas become reality.

Proposal to the City of Boston

On March 27, 1851 he delivered his historic proposal to the mayor of Boston. The
proposal was 28 pages long with a colored illustrated map plotting out the proposed
signal and alarm circuits. The proposal had all the elements of a modern engineering
proposal: objectives, technical requirements, operations, equipment description,
schematic diagrams, construction cost estimate, installation schedule, licensing of
Morse’s patents, staffing recommendations, plus a brief estimate of annual operating
costs.
He broke down the emergency response problem into two steps: first, getting citizens to
report fires by sending a signal to a central office; then alert fire stations and get firemen
moving smartly to the scene of the fire. The proposal is quite clear as to what the system
functional requirements are: In Channing’s own words:
1. “instantaneous communication of the intelligence of a fire”
2. “means of striking a definite alarm”
3. “security against interruptions of communications and alarms”
 4. “security against false alarms” and
5. control of fire department resources under one agency
The telegraph would provide rapid and instantaneous communications. But the proposal
promised much more than that. Just the telegraph alone wasn’t going to convince
skeptics, especially those with bad experiences involving telegraph service or
malfunctions. As we shall see later, the telegraph was only one of many components in
the system. He wanted rapid communications, but he also wanted a system that was
dependable. Paraphrasing what Channing said in one of his lectures, the fire alarm system
would have to provide unerring certainty of operations because the public would rely
on it for emergencies. “Instantaneous, universal, and dependable” were his guiding
design principles. He knew that if his innovation was going to be accepted by the public,
then it had to work correctly at all times.
The word availability is often used with the development of critical and emergency
systems. Availability is a measure of the degree to which it is operable at the start of a
mission when it is called for at a random point in time. Channing used “unerring certainty
of operations” to convey the same meaning.
Signal Stations: 26 signal stations were initially proposed. These proposed signal
stations were expected to be mounted indoors, under lock and key with a sign reading -
“In case of fire the key may be found at_________”. Watchmen and business owners
would have had access to these boxes. Moreover, the proposal is vague about how the
signal station was suppose to work. Presumably it was going to be mechanically quick
and easy. Signal station would cause its circuit to open and close, signaling the district
and box number to a remote central office, thereby alerting the agent on duty who would
translate the dots and dashes.
Alarm Station: 19 alarm stations were proposed. Each alarm station would consist of a
custom built bell striking machine. Bells weighted anywhere from 300 to 3700 pounds.
Bell striking machines would be located in church steeples all over town. These machines
were going to be electrically actuated by individual electric solenoids, presumably
connected to a 24 volt battery. The central office operator would depress the alarm
pushbutton, thereby energizing the district alarm circuit causing all of the bells to strike in
unison. Getting five or more bells of different sizes to ring simultaneously was not going
to be an easy task. This interesting electro-mechanical problem is discussed at length by
Bosch in Reference 7.
Central Office: City hall was proposed as a suitable location for a command post.
Batteries, instruments, control pushbuttons, telegraph registers, and so on, were to be
located there. An agent, an operator, would be posted there 24 – 7. Upon receipt of a
signal for help, he would dispatch fire engines to the scene. Firefighters on the scene
would use the nearest signaling station to communicate with the central office by keying
telegraphic messages using the signal key.
Circuits: Two classes of circuits were proposed: signaling circuits and alarm circuits.
These two classes of circuits are illustrated in Reference 2
To prevent interruption of service due to broken conductors, each circuit had to be in
duplicate. Each circuit was connected from station to station then looped back to central
office, also improving reliability. Interestingly, separation of redundant circuits was
discussed to guard against common mode failures. Separation was a way to guard against
circuit tampering, or falling ice and snow, from affecting both circuits simultaneously.
Ground return was not to be used because an accidental connection made between the
wire and ground would complete an ‘open’ circuit, or affect part of a ‘closed’ circuit He
also imposed strict controls over the installation and arrangement of conductors.
The proposal specified periodic testing of circuits. This may not have been a novel idea
since the telegraph industry did routine testing of circuits. Routine tests on circuits help
detect failures early so repairs may be made. The proposal specified that periodic test be
carried out automatically.

Construction of the First Fire Alarm Telegraph System

Soon after successful completion of initial trials, the City of Boston appropriated funds
to complete the project. A special committee was appointed to oversee the installation.
Moses Farmer was appointed superintendent of construction and licenses were obtained
from Samuel Morse for his patents. Actual outside work began on September 7, 1851.
The following paragraphs describe the system that was actually constructed, which
deviated somewhat from the proposal. But first, the basic elements of the fire alarm
system will be explained using the electrical schematic drawing submitted with the
Channing and Farmer patent application.
The telegraphic fire alarm system consisted of three basic elements as illustrated in the
US patent diagram:
 A – signal station
 B – central station (same as central office)
 C – alarm station
As previously mentioned, there were two distinct types of circuits: signaling circuits
which connected signal stations to the central station; alarm circuits which connected the
central station to alarm stations. Conductors were installed in duplicate as shown by items
I’s & k’s and EE’s & DD’s. The patent covered two categories of circuits, the series
connected and the open type circuit. Originally, signal circuits were open type, but this
was changed to series by connecting Morse’s keys in series, which was standard practice
in the American telegraph industry. On the other hand, alarm circuits were open type,
with solenoids connected in parallel.
Districts: The city was divided into six zones or districts. Each district was connected by
three signaling circuits and three alarm circuits.
Wiring: The fire alarm system consisted of 23 miles of single signaling and alarm
circuits. Each circuit was made up of #8 and #10 conductors, Swedish iron, strung out
alongside of buildings and supported on glass insulators. 50 poles were used between
buildings. Since each circuit was run in duplicate, the total circuit length in miles was 46.
Its unclear whether these wires were insulated or not. Werner says they were not,
however Channing stated that conductors had to be insulated numerous times in his
writing.
Signal Stations: The number of stations actually installed was 41. This apparatus is
illustrated in figure 4 of Reference 3. Boxes were distributed as follows:
 North signaling circuit had 18
 South signaling circuit had 16
 South Boston signaling circuit had 7
Signal stations were attached to walls of building. They were cast iron boxes, sealed and
made water tight, much like today’s boxes except painted black instead of red. Each box
had a lightning arrestor, a writing magnet and armature, a weighted hand crank, a toothed
code wheel and a spring key. The signal key was available for sending messages by hand
using Morse code. Signal stations were made to work correctly, but only after repeated
design changes. The final design that lasted till the 1860’s, consisted of a hand crank
attached to a gear connected to the code wheel. Turning the crank turned the code wheel
which actuated the spring key, making and breaking the circuit. The code wheel first
transmitted the district number by a series of dots, then the station number was
transmitted in telegraphic character which included at least one dash.
Alarm Bell- Striking Machines: 19 bell-striking machines were installed. This
apparatus is illustrated in this article. Alarm circuits were distributed as follows:
 North alarm circuit - 3 miles long with 8 bells
 South alarm circuit - 5 miles long with 9 bells
 South Boston alarm circuit - 6 miles long with 2 bells
The Central Office: was located in one of the rooms in the city building at Court Square
and Williams Court. It housed the following apparatus -
 triple receiving magnet with alarm bell (see illustration)
 a district keyboard for striking the district number of the alarm bells (see figure 6)
 triple alarm Morse register
 circuit testing clock with audible alarm for testing every hour
 switches, keys and accessories
 electrical batteries for the signal box circuits were in the same building
 water driven dynamo for alarm circuits
All conductors in the interior of the building, including those entering and leaving the
building through the roof, were installed in gas pipes. 48 single conductors poked through
the roof of the building.
After construction was partially completed, Farmer was appointed superintendent of
operations, a position he held for about two years while improving the system. After a
long trial and error period, the municipal fire alarm system was turned over to the city
and placed in service, April 28, 1852. Permanent operating staff included the position of
superintendent, an operator, and an electrician.

System Performance

For the first few years after completion, failures and malfunctions continued to plague
operations. Eventually, Farmer’s hard work paid off to the extent that the system was
declared fully operational and placed in service. By 1854 Channing and Farmer were
ready to apply for a joint patent. This section will explain how well the system
accomplished its mission.
Firemen’s acceptance of the new system was very important. At first, firemen were
opposed to the new system, but their attitude changed as system reliability improved.
Also, citizens’ complaints decreased drastically with the completion of frequent
adjustments and retests of local church bells.
There is evidence that Channing was very pleased with the system’s performance. In a
lecture to the Smithsonian, he reported that firemen had learned to operate fire alarm
equipment properly. During fire emergencies, firemen would cluster around the nearest
street box to find out which street box number initiated the alarm, thereby finding out
where the fire was. At the scene of the fire, men stayed in touch with the central office,
either waiting for instructions or reporting their status.
System reliability also improved. In one year, central office recorded only 12 false alarms
out of a total of 195 fire calls. Six of these alarms had been initiated by citizens who later
admitted acting prematurely; the remaining six were due to unknown causes, that is,
random failures. Over the years, great improvements have been made to reduce failure
rates to very low levels, consistent with today’s expectations.
Soon after 1854, similar fire alarm systems were installed in various cities. These
performed successfully, judging from expert testimonies given before the Commissioner
of Patents in 1857.
The Commissioner tried to put a monetary value to Channing and Farmer’s invention:
“That this invention is valuable and important would seem to me to need no
demonstration. Witnesses find it difficult to set a money value upon the invention; though
they all agreed that the annual saving to the country in consequence of the invention, is
many millions of dollars, besides many human lives.”
The chief engineer of the fire department of Newark, New Jersey, testified as to the
benefits: “ I believe it is a great advantage to the people of Newark, and during the last
year it has saved from $30,000 to $50,000 in losses, by giving quick alarm.” “Every
minute saved at a conflagration in providing the means of extinction is regarded by fire
engineers as of the utmost important. This expresses my opinion as to the value of time.”
Another expert in the business reported: “the great importance of the telegraph is of
using so much less of our engines than we would under the old system.”
A final measure of the system’s performance, was the success it achieved all across the
country. By 1857, the Channing and Farmer fire alarm system had been installed in New
York, Cincinnati, Detroit, Albany, New Haven, Mobile, St. Louis, Chicago, and nearly
forty other cities and towns, including Montreal.

Landmark Features

Communication Centers
The first control center was illustrated in 1852. The room was photographed soon after
the invention of photography as seen in the accompanying figures. Then and now,
functions by the fire alarm operator have not changes:
The communication center is the building used to house the central operating part of the
fire alarm system; usually the place where the necessary testing, switching, receiving,
transmitting devices and power supplies are located. In 1851 Channing emphasized the
importance of this center: “It is necessary, in the first place, to have so important a
system under the control of some department or agent of the city government and to
provide for intelligent direction at its Center”.
This control center was essentially unchanged 50 years later, except for improvements in
hardware which Bosch wrote about in Reference 7: “The general plan of a modern central
office fire alarm system stills resembles that outlined by Dr. Channing, fifty-two years
ago; but, in the instruments and apparatus used, most wonderful improvements have been
made.”
Receipt and Transmission of Alarms
NFPA Article 9.5 specifies that recording devices are necessary in each communications
center to automatically receive and record all alarms from street boxes. Additional
provisions include:
 a device for producing a permanent graphic recording of all alarms, trouble and
test signals
 a permanent visual record and an audible signal shall be required to indicate the
receipt of an alarm. The permanent record shall indicate the exact location and
time the alarm was transmitted.
 a minimum of two separate means of transmitting alarms to the fire stations shall
be provided.
These topics were addressed by Channing. Alarms were to be automatically received and
recorded at the central office. Instruments were necessary to give a permanent visual
record and to alert the operator of each incoming alarm. Early recording instruments,
crude by today’s standards, indicated the exact location from which the alarm was
transmitted.
Channing wanted to prevent human errors and eliminate false alarms, critical topics
covered by the NFPA. In 1851, Channing proposed that alarms be transmitted by
‘machinery’; today we use computer assisted dispatching systems with carefully designed
hardware and software. In his own words: “It is necessary also to provide means to
complete the Circuit of the alarm bells with perfect regularity and at perfect intervals,
which would be impossible, except by machinery placed at the Central Office.”
Fifty years later in the late 1890’s, Adam Bosch, AIEE member, noted that instruments to
prevent human errors and false alarms had evolved considerably: “In central offices
equipped with new apparatus within the last few years, every safeguard is provided to
prevent mistakes in the transmission of alarms. With the first blow on the gong from a
signal box, a cylindrical indicator revolves and exposes the number of the circuit from
which the signal is being received, as well as the number of every box on that circuit. The
operator may therefore while counting the signal set the transmitter, and with one glance
at the printed record of the register, and another at the circuit indicator, verify its
correctness and have the alarm in process of transmission within five seconds after the
completion of the first round from the box.”
Monitoring for Circuit Integrity
NFPA specifies that wired circuits, upon which transmission and receipts of alarms
depend, shall be constantly monitored, or supervised, to give prompt warnings of
conditions adversely affecting reliability. Monitoring shall be accomplished
automatically. Monitoring apparatus also provides a record of the condition of the circuits
at stated periods of time. All monitoring for integrity of box circuits shall be provided
with a visual and audible means. Any conductor failure in the installation, such as open or
ground faults, can be automatically indicated within 200 seconds.
Channing in 1851: “ It is essential to have systematic means of testing all the circuits
employed in the Fire System. Where a closed Signal Circuit is used, an interruption from
any cause, gives of itself a Signal at the Central office. Where an open circuit is used, as
it is in connection with the Alarm machinery, other means must be employed.”
Reliability Features
Judging by the many NFPA articles governing system design and installation, reliability
is more demanding than ever before. We will mention just a few features involving
system reliability:
 Interconnection means shall be arranged so that a single break or single ground
will not cause an alarm signal.
 An open, ground, or short circuit fault on the installation conductors of one alarm
circuit shall not affect the operation of any other alarm circuit.
 Two separate means for transmitting fire alarms
7. Conclusions
In 1925 Boston’s central fire alarm office was relocated to new headquarters on the
Fenway in Boston, the site currently occupied. At the time, the new facility was well
publicized in engineering journals as well as in a commemorative brochure by the
Gamewell Company. Their brochure is included in this submission because of historical
photographs of the facility.
There are approximately 1500 fire alarm boxes in service in the streets throughout the
city and over 1200 master boxes in public and private buildings. The system still operates
independently of telephone and electric utility lines and has an uninterruptible power
supply.
Today in Boston, telegraphic principles are still used but only in street boxes. When you
depress the lever, accessible through a small door, you initiate a spring-wound clockwork
mechanism which transmits a code number to the central station. Alarms of fire are
transmitted to all firehouses over the telegraph system just as they have for the last 140
years. Before the advent of the two-way radios, striking alarms over the fire alarm
telegraph system was the only means of alerting fire companies. The fire alarm office
also communicated with fire companies at the scene of a fire via the telegraph system
using Morse code. Boston fire alarm operators continued using Morse code until March
1988, at which point a modern digital system went into affect. However, the old red street
boxes still send signals telegraphically.
That the fire alarm telegraph system contributed to the well being of Boston is self
evident. It gave people a way to get help quickly and automatically at the outbreak of
fires. Although there are three types of transmission systems in use today, telegraphic,
telephone and radio communication, much of the original hardwired technology, methods
and procedures still apply. For that reason, the fire alarm system of Boston deserves to be
recognized as an important IEEE milestone.

An Explanation of Fire Alarm for the Electrician

Depending on the hazard being protected, a fire alarm system includes one or more of
several types of alarm-initiating devices. One of these types that everyone is familiar with
is the manual pull-station. These are basically electrical switches, and most can be re-set
after use. Historically, these have been the favorite targets of juvenile pranksters, and
automatic detection devices are much more in demand in the marketplace today.

Heat Detectors
The types of detection devices to be implemented normally depend on design decisions
made by the consulting engineer prior to construction of a new building. For example, a
fire alarm designer will typically call for automatic heat detectors to supplement a
preaction or deluge system. For those system types, the valve controlling water discharge
to sprinkler nozzles will not open unless a signal has been received from the heat
detection device.
The simplest type of heat detector is the fixed-temperature unit. Heat from a fire activates
this detector, which contains a fusible alloy that melts rapidly at a specific ceiling
temperature. This action causes the internal electrical contacts to operate, initiating the
alarm signal. Temperature settings will range for these devices (just like sprinkler heads),
with 140˚F being a good call for normal conditions.
NFPA Pamphlet No. 72 calls out coverages and areas of application for the installation of
these units, which depends on a variety of factors, including ceiling height. The coverage
area per detector is maximized when there is a smooth ceiling with no airflow
obstruction. You need explosion-proof wiring on any detector located in an electrical
equipment room.
A rate-of-rise heat detector includes a small air vent that allows for expansion and
contraction of air inside the unit’s housing. When temperature changes in the room cause
the air inside the device to expand more quickly than it can escape from the air hole,
pressure is exerted on the diaphragm, which makes the electrical contact. Like the fixed-
temperature heat detector, this device is reliable and has a low false-alarm rate.
The advantage of the rate-of-rise detector is that, even if the space above the point of fire
origin has not yet reached 140 degrees at the ceiling, for example, it will initiate an alarm
as soon as the rate of temperature increase exceeds a predetermined value, such as 12˚F
per minute. There is a special label on all detectors classified for hazardous areas.

Smoke Detectors

Smoke detectors can be a less expensive option, often featured as the “blue-light special”
at K-Mart. Available since 1960, these detect fire by sensing “particles of combustion”
and certain gases in smoke. With an ionization smoke detector, the design intent is that
they are “on” at all times. Ionized air in the sensing chamber serves as a conductor
between two charged electrodes. But when smoke particles present themselves, the air
conductance is decreased. When decreased sufficiently, the electrical charge is “off,” and
that quickly signals an alarm.
The absolute maximum spacing recommendation for smoke detectors is 900 square feet
(not exceeding 41 feet apart) and less than this when an increased response time is
imperative. Ionization detectors will give off a false alarm when humidity exceeds a high
level, such as 90% or more. Don’t install these next to a shower door.
A photoelectric smoke detector, which is more expensive, contains a photosensitive
device. It doesn’t really “see” the smoke, but operates when there is a change in the
intensity of light (caused by the smoke). Another type of photoelectric smoke detector
contains a displaced photosensitive receiver, which only initiates an alarm when the
smoke particles collecting in the chamber scatter the incoming light, causing light from
the source to then strike the receiver. In either case, these units have been proven very
effective in spaces with a potential for smoldering fires.
Some computer rooms may contain a combination of photoelectric and ionization smoke
detectors, the principle being that both have to operate before the alarm system is
activated. Since smoke dissipates less rapidly than heat, smoke detectors are generally a
better design option for larger open rooms. And, measurable amounts of smoke almost
always precede measurable amounts of heat, which is why engineers often call for both
sprinklers and smoke detectors in a building.
Smoke detectors have been a source of annoying false alarm problems in the past,
although nuisance alarms from newer commercial alarm systems installed today with
improved technology are becoming increasingly uncommon.
Flame Detectors
Another detector type famous for false alarms is the very sensitive, but very quick-
responding, flame detector. You will usually find these detectors in occupancies with
aerosol-filling or paint-mixing operations, or other areas where flammable vapors or
dusts are present. They are expensive but necessary in rooms with explosion potential due
to their superior speed of detection. They are able to sense sparks, flames, glowing
embers or other sources of radiation. Of the two types, ultraviolet and infrared, the
ultraviolet detector is the fastest, making it an ideal choice in a hazardous area where very
rapid fires may occur. The field placement of these devices is critical for successful use,
and care must be exercised so that large equipment or piled storage does not interfere
with their “line of sight.”
The absolute maximum spacing recommendation for smoke detectors is 900 square
feet (not exceeding 41 feet apart) and less than this when an increased response time is
imperative.

Alarm Systems

The most essential ingredient of any fire alarm system is continuous monitoring.
Integrated with the alarm initiating devices, the alarm system is a life-safety building
feature which simultaneously alerts the local fire department while loudly notifying
building occupants of the immediate need to evacuate the structure.
Fire alarm systems come in many varieties—six to be exact. Two of these, local fire
alarm systems and emergency voice/alarm communication systems, will at minimum
sound a local alarm to notify building occupants of a fire. With emergency voice/alarm
communication, the occupants also receive information and instructions pertaining to the
emergency at hand. Both of these system types may also provide prompt notification to
the local fire service.
The alarms from an auxiliary fire alarm system are received by a municipal signaling
system for transmission to the public fire service communication system. All protected
properties within that community have a similar connection to this alarm protective
signaling system. This setup is in contrast to proprietary station systems, which are in
wide use at very large industrial facilities containing various properties under one
ownership. With that system, transmitted signals are received and recorded automatically
at a supervisory station that is located at either the protected premises or another location
of the property owner.
The central station fire alarm system consists of the operation of circuits and devices
transmitted to a manned central station operated by an independent firm. That firm is in
the business of monitoring and maintaining signaling systems and retransmitting alarm
signals received to the appropriate public fire service. Except for the means of electrical
signal transmission, this is a lot like the proprietary system. What is similar in scope is
the remote station signaling system, which transmits signals from one or more premises
to an (off-site) remote monitoring location (approved by local authorities), where the
appropriate action is taken. The signal is transmitted over a leased telephone line to the
police station, fire department or telephone answering service. If the remote station is at
the police station or the answering service, the fire department personnel are immediately
notified.
All of these fire alarm systems have alarm-initiating device circuits which interconnect
the fire alarm control panel with automatic detectors, pull stations and sprinkler system
waterflow indicators (flow switches).
Another feature that all fire alarm systems have in common is that they are all required by
code to have a backup source of electrical supply.
Requirements for all systems are covered thoroughly in NFPA 72, the National Fire
Alarm Code. It is important that all equipment be listed by a testing and inspection
agency laboratory, and installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.
Professionals accurately point out that while conventional alarm systems have been
installed in commercial buildings for many years, the newer systems keep getting better
and better.
What distinguishes the modern-day fire alarm systems is their interconnective
capabilities, or “single-seat control.” Beyond simply transmitting a fire alarm, they are
able to activate elevator recall, control exit doors, or as previously mentioned, actuate
preaction or deluge extinguishing systems. A signal received from one or more detection
devices may also be used to operate smoke control equipment. Here, the fire alarm
system can truly be viewed as a life-saving device, because smoke kills. With either the
active or passive approach to smoke control, the interconnective fire alarm system
utilizes the building’s air-handling equipment. In the passive approach, all fans and
smoke dampers (within the ductwork) are shut down during fire conditions. With “active”
smoke control, the air conditioning system is used to exhaust smoke from inside the
building to the exterior. For obvious reasons, interconnectivity is also very cost-effective.