Incompatible Monitor Module Behavior (MS-9050UD)?

I have a new Fire-Lite MS-9050UD, and I have an ADT M300MADT monitor module (the ADT version of the Fire-Lite M300) connected to the panel. The loop protocol is set to CLIP. My Fire-Lite M300 is working correctly, but, whenever I activate the pull station connected to the M300MADT, it does not go into alarm. The module appears to be polling with the system. The only trouble on the system is coming from that ADT monitor module.

If a module is incompatible with the panel, would it poll? Are the two COMM LOSS terminals for the cable shield? Any ideas on how to get this to activate the system?

Do you know if the moniter modual works correctly

I have no idea, that’s why I’m trying to figure out how it would be functioning if it was just incompatible.

I have another quick question:
The LED’s on one of my SD355T smoke detectors keeps lighting up steady for about 2 or 3 seconds, then continues to flash. What does this mean? The other one does not do that. Is this a developing maintenance condition?

Thanks!

Ya I don’t know then sorry.

It’s alright, this is tricky. I’m hoping a technician knows the answer, and will post it.

Ya like magnumalert

Never mind…my other detector also just did that.

As far as the monitor module, I still need help.

All of the rebranded M300 modules are compatible with the CLIP protocol. Are you using the proper 47K resistor? Is the pull station connected to contacts 6 and 7? Is the module programmed for class-B wiring? Try shorting together those contacts without the pull station or resistor and see if it activates. Does the panel report a trouble when the resistor is removed? If it’s still not working, you might just have a bad module.

As far as the polling LED’s, they sometimes tend to freeze or go off for a few seconds at a time. My 7100 occasionally does the same thing.

This should explain everything:

“INVREP” stands for invalid reply, meaning that there is a hardware problem with the addressable device. That probably means it’s broken. Did you buy the module new or used?

I bought it new, in an opened package. So, I’m guessing I should return it.

Hello, the seller was nice enough to ship a new one to me for free, without me returning the other one.

Unfortunately, this one is doing the same thing.

What’s odd is that the seller listed it as “new”, but stated in the description that it is new in an opened package. Both modules came in a MMF-300 package, without instructions, mounting screws, or the EOL resistor. I left positive feedback stating that not all hardware was included, then the seller lowered the price, and added that the unit is missing resistors to the description. Also, the “new” replacement unit I received had an address already programmed with the rotary switches. Peculiar.

Are you guys positive these re-branded modules will work with a Fire-Lite panel?

Hmmm…something I just realized is that the M300 is an obsolete model. It’s possible that it’s reporting a model number that the MS-9050UD doesn’t recognize. The panel might not be able to support both legacy and new devices on the same loop. Or the seller may just have a bad batch of modules.

In any case, sticking with newer Fire-Lite addressable equipment would be your best bet. Here is a current model that gives you two circuits.

I have the panel set to CLIP mode, so it can recognize the older and newer series. It might be a bad batch, but they appear to be used. I don’t know. I have two separate spots that would take a monitor module, so I need two separate modules, not a dual module. I might just return them for a refund.

Also, my Fire-Lite M300 works fine in the loop.

dose the new one you recived work

No, it’s doing the same thing.

Huh interesting

IF MODULE IS OLD YOU MAY HAVE TO SWEEP THE ADDRESS SELECTOR SEVERAL TIMES TO MAKE SURE THE CONTACTS MAKE. DO BOTH TENS AND UNITS. TO VERIFY ATTACH ONLY THE QUESTIONABLE DEVICE ON A PANEL AND DO AN AUTO POLL. IF IT IS WORKING PANEL SHOULD FIND IT. CAUTION YOU COULD WIPE OUT ALL OTHER POINTS PROGRAMMED.

IN ANY CASE I WOULD NOT PUT ANY DEVICE ON A SYSTEM UNLESS IT WAS VERIFIABLE NEW, JUST FROM THE LIABILITY STAND POINT.