Local sounders in hotel rooms....

[Big_Fella]

Surely, given the fact that there must be some cause and effect strategy in place to operate these local sounders, it cannot be a huge task to offer the customer the option to make them monitored.  I assume the must be currently running off an interface?  Change this to sounder controllers of what ever protocol is running and hey presto, monitored sounders

[Allen Higginson]

Having re-read the OP it appears that they may be using the remote LED to switch the room sounder (unless I have missed something else in my re-read!).
What protocol is it Dave - if it is Apollo you could use the ancillary sounder base which works the same as the above,gives 85dB at 1 metre and is monitored in that if the head is removed you get a fault up,thus keeping everyone happy with very little extra outlay!?

[David Rooney]

All very good points wizz big and buzz......!

The system is going to be replaced. My pointy for asking the question is simply because I am curious to know whether everyone thinks this is right wrong or indifferent....

The system is presently a Wormald PBS2 (!!!!!)

Yes sounder controllers is already a considered option, but IF the room sounders are not required under BS then there is no point.

The sounders could well be controlled by an LED output/relaybase as I'm not sure the PBS system has the processing power to handle the cause and effects which probably amount to around 800 separate events in this place.

Regading the side issue of whether the sounders are delayed in the room or not, this is perhaps more a moral question than a technical one...!

[Allen Higginson]

There is no cause and effect if they are using the LED Dave (as is the case with the modern Apollo solution) as it operates when the head does.
It's an easy solution if the aim is to waken the room occupant if their detector activates whilst permitting an investigation time prior to needing to get everyone out.

[Big_Fella]

Indeed.  It seems as if the system was installed using the voice alarm/delay method, then after the event someone wasnt happy with the delay in the point of origin so the sounders were provided after.

I think the PBS runs on system sensor protocol, does it not?

[David Rooney]

Yep Mr Fella.... tis SS protocol.....

So is general concensus that a reasonable risk assessment might conclude that the local room sounders are not necessary?

In which case presumably the RP has the authority these days to do away with them despite what the local IO might think (if he's still around) considering the evidence that other hotels also employ delays without alerting the occupant in the room of origin....?

[kurnal]

Therefore they are there to provide the room occupant with an early warning (i.e not having to wait for the voice evac. to operate). Because of this they are an integral part of the fire alarm warning system and are surely subject to all the standard BS recommendations.

Wiz this is the crux of the issue. The jury is out on this and I believe one of our regular posters is involved in a current determination to clarify this point.

In Messys example of the hotel suites, it was clear that the detection and alarm was provided precisely for the benefit of the occupant of the room.

But in most hotels the detection is there to protect the escape routes as per the  L2 category of BS5839 part 1.  Hence the BS still allows heat detectors in rooms. So it could be argued that that the alarm sounder in the room is over and above the basic requirement for compliance. But I still agree with you that it should be reported as a variation. 
My personal view is that we should protect the occupants of hotel rooms by the provision of smoke detection and sounders- because it can be done easily and cheaply. But thats back to an old chestnut and hopefully the forthcoming determination will provide clarification.

[Allen Higginson]

Therefore they are there to provide the room occupant with an early warning (i.e not having to wait for the voice evac. to operate). Because of this they are an integral part of the fire alarm warning system and are surely subject to all the standard BS recommendations.

Wiz this is the crux of the issue. The jury is out on this and I believe one of our regular posters is involved in a current determination to clarify this point.

In Messys example of the hotel suites, it was clear that the detection and alarm was provided precisely for the benefit of the occupant of the room.

But in most hotels the detection is there to protect the escape routes as per the  L2 category of BS5839 part 1.  Hence the BS still allows heat detectors in rooms. So it could be argued that that the alarm sounder in the room is over and above the basic requirement for compliance. But I still agree with you that it should be reported as a variation. 
My personal view is that we should protect the occupants of hotel rooms by the provision of smoke detection and sounders- because it can be done easily and cheaply. But thats back to an old chestnut and hopefully the forthcoming determination will provide clarification.

....and hopefully an amen to that!

[Wiz]

Prof. Kurnal,

I'm now very worried.

I thought this post was only about the need or not for a Variation to highlight unmonitored sounders.

It quickly transpired that some people thought that if the sounders weren't strictly necessary then a Variation was not necessary.

I still think a Variation for the lack of monitoring is necessary, but all this pales into insignificance against part of your last post. You wrote:

But in most hotels the detection is there to protect the escape routes as per the  L2 category of BS5839 part 1.  Hence the BS still allows heat detectors in rooms. So it could be argued that that the alarm sounder in the room is over and above the basic requirement for compliance.

I had no idea that the category of a system determined the requirement for sounders or not!

I would put it to you, my learned friend, that it doesn't matter a jot if you have smoke or heats in a bedroom and it doesn't matter what the L system category may or may not be. Quites simply sufficient sounders must be installed to achieve the recommended minimum sound level in all instances. This might include a sounder in the bedroom even if the bedroom only has a heat detector or no detectors at all.

Have I misunderstood what you meant?

 

[kurnal]

Dr Wiz

I had assumed that in this case the room sounders in question were ancillary to the voice alarm system used  for general evacuation and only there to give an immediate  warning to the occupant because the fire is in their own room, ie performing the role of a domestic smoke alarm. I had assumed that they were NOT installed because of concerns over audibility of the main voice alarm cos that would be really confusing and may prevent people from hearing the voice alarm......

(just about to launch my new collection of confusing postings by Kurnal volume 19999)

[David Rooney]

Men.... please make as many assumptions as necessary because I have no definative answers.

This is simply an existing system I have come across, and am bi curious as to how and why it works the way it does.

And along the way am opening up the exploratory canals as to whether this complies, doesn't comply, and the ethics of not waking the person in the room immediately on activation of the local detector.

I don't believe the sounders are installed in order to attain 75db... the VA system can manage that.

So I assume they are there to wake/protect the sleeping risk whch as K rightly says, is not the objective of an L2 system. In which case:

A. I agree they are a variation as they are not monitored, moreover, if they were required then I think it was a diabolical variation (or a cheap fix) not to monitor the circuits !

B. Is it reasonable to delay sounders in the room of origin? (at £sillymoney/night i think i'd like to be woken straight away if there was a chance my room was on fire!!)

[Wiz]

........This is simply an existing system I have come across, and am bi curious as to how and why it works the way it does................

David, are you on the wrong site?

I myself am buysexual - if I want sex, I have to pay for it!

[Allen Higginson]

........This is simply an existing system I have come across, and am bi curious as to how and why it works the way it does................

David, are you on the wrong site?

I myself am buysexual - if I want sex, I have to pay for it!

Thats the end of the salsa dancing in The Empire for you my boy!!!!

[David Rooney]

Errrr I'm a biker.... salsa.?.......moi.....!!! 

[David Rooney]

........This is simply an existing system I have come across, and am bi curious as to how and why it works the way it does................

David, are you on the wrong site?

I myself am buysexual - if I want sex, I have to pay for it!

I think we all have to pay for it in some way shape or form..... and now the pound equals the euro you can't even offer a cheap weekend away....!!