FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: muggins on January 30, 2008, 11:25:53 AM
-
Any advice on the best way to mask the appearance of smoke/heat detectors? I'm thinking of two scenarios - historic buildings and sleek contemporary dwellings. Are there any types that are smaller or less obtrusive than others?
Thanks
-
Aspirating detectors can be installed so all you see is a tiny hole or capillary tube poking through a hole. The system draws air through the tubes and analyses them for signs of fire. Take a look at Airsense Technology and VESDA - try google.
-
I saw an advert in a fire engineering magazine for detectors with various coloured covers, even wood grain effect. Can't remember the manufacturer but they are definately available and were designed for exactly your problem.
Will go and search my back issues but I'm sure the Alarm Fraternity will be "In Like Flint" with the answer.
-
Hi
We offer designer detectors - let me know if interested and i can email you some specs.
-
Daren, that would be great thanks
-
would aspirating systems have a much higher cost than normal smoke detectors?
-
One of my clients has just bought a VESDA unit for £645.00. You would then have to allow for install and pipe, fittings, commissioning etc. If you are looking to compare the cost of a single detector then the answer is no, a point detector is cheaper. When you add the wiring, visual impact etc then it becomes a bit more interesting. Also, you have to remember that VESDA or similar is far more sensitive than a normal detector, so this has a value as well. Faster response means less damage, faster escape etc.
I worked on a project many years ago where I designed aspirating systems for the Royal palace in Madrid. The sample pipes were concealed behind curtains and below window ledges!
-
One of my clients has just bought a VESDA unit for £645.00. You would then have to allow for install and pipe, fittings, commissioning etc. If you are looking to compare the cost of a single detector then the answer is no, a point detector is cheaper. When you add the wiring, visual impact etc then it becomes a bit more interesting. Also, you have to remember that VESDA or similar is far more sensitive than a normal detector, so this has a value as well. Faster response means less damage, faster escape etc.
I worked on a project many years ago where I designed aspirating systems for the Royal palace in Madrid. The sample pipes were concealed behind curtains and below window ledges!
How'd that work then???If primary detection surely they must be installed as per point detection design specifications??
-
This was Spain 1986! Standards, what standards. The ceilings in all the rooms were ceramic. By installing sample pipes up behind the curtains and under window ledges it improved the level of smoke detection 100% as before this they had nothing. Sometimes you have to think outside of the box...
-
can anyone tell me how often smoke detectors are supposed to be tested and where i can find it in black and white?
I really could do with someones help in this please.
Leeo
-
Leeo
You will find all the information in BS 5839 pt1 2002. If you dont have access to this standard ( it costs about £60 from memory) you could get yourself a copy of our standard log book. By kind permission of those very nice chaps at HMSO and the BSI etc etc we reprint the section on regular testing in the front.
If you repost giving me an Email address I will send you a copy. I dony know how to do these clever linky things that the other guys do because I am just a thick Yorkshireman.
Dave
-
can anyone tell me how often smoke detectors are supposed to be tested and where i can find it in black and white?
I really could do with someones help in this please.
Leeo
As said above, the "black and white" answers are contained within British Standard 5839 Part 1.
The short answer is that for most modern systems your contractor should service the system twice a year. At each visit they will tend to do 50% of detectors and check and panel and batteries. Faults should be repaired urgently, don't wait for the next service visit. Someone should look at the panel every day to check it is OK and someone should set of the alarms by testing a different call point once per week.
-
Try Global Fire Systems 0870 2208211 ask for Ian Phelps, they can mask heads with various colours including various types of wood grains and even marble effects.
-
can anyone tell me how often smoke detectors are supposed to be tested and where i can find it in black and white?
I really could do with someones help in this please.
Leeo
Leeo I presume you are talking about a fire alarm system in the workplace?
-
Hi Buddy
Let me have your email and i can send the data/images through on the designer heads.
Daren
daren@triplestarfire.com
-
thanks darren - please email to emma@dcswx.ie
-
From BS 5839-1:2002
Section 6 45.4 Recommendations for inspection and test of the system over a 12 month period
In addition to the work recommended in 45.3, it is recommended that the following work be carried out every year. NOTE 1 The work described may be carried out over the course of two or more service visits during each twelve month period.
a) The switch mechanism of every manual call point should be tested, either by removal of a frangible element, insertion of a test key or operation of the device as it would be operated in the event of fire.
b) All automatic fire detectors should be examined, as far as practicable, to ensure that they have not been damaged, painted, or otherwise adversely affected.
Thereafter, every detector should be functionally tested. The tests used need prove only that the detectors are connected to the system, are operational and are capable of responding to the phenomena they are designed to detect.
c) Every heat detector should be functionally tested by means of a suitable heat source, unless operation of the detector in this manner would then necessitate replacement of part or all of the sensing element (e.g. as in fusible link point detectors or non-integrating line detectors). Special test arrangements will be required for fusible link heat detectors. The heat source should not have the potential to ignite a fire; live flame should not be used, and special equipment might be necessary in explosive atmospheres.
d) Point smoke detectors should be functionally tested by a method that confirms that smoke can enter the detector chamber and produce a fire alarm signal (e.g. by use of apparatus that generates simulated smoke or suitable aerosols around the detector). It should be ensured that the material used does not cause damage to, or affect the subsequent performance of, the detector; the manufacturers guidance on suitable materials should be followed.
e) Optical beam smoke detectors should be functionally tested by introducing signal attenuation between the transmitter and receiver, either by use of an optical filter, smoke or simulated smoke.
f) Aspirating fire detection systems should be functionally tested as described in 45.4d), with each sampling point, or group of sampling points, in the pipework of the system treated as a point detector. Note that not all test products may be appropriate for the purpose.
g) Carbon monoxide fire detectors should be functionally tested by a method that confirms that carbon monoxide can enter the detector chamber and produce a fire alarm signal (e.g. by use of apparatus that generates carbon monoxide or a gas that has a similar effect on the electro-chemical cell as carbon monoxide). WARNING Carbon monoxide is a highly toxic gas, and suitable precautions should be taken in its use. NOTE 2 It should be ensured that any test gas used does not cause damage to, or affect the subsequent performance of, the detector; the manufacturers guidance on suitable test gases should be followed.
h) Flame detectors should be functionally tested by a method that confirms that the detector will respond to a suitable frequency of radiation and produce a fire alarm signal. The guidance of the manufacturer on testing of detectors should be followed.
i) In fire detection systems that enable analogue values to be determined at the control and indicating equipment, it should be confirmed that each analogue value is within the range specified by the manufacturer. j) Multi-sensor detectors should be operated by a method that confirms that products of combustion in the vicinity of the detector can reach the sensors and that a fire signal can be produced as appropriate.
-
Any advice on the best way to mask the appearance of smoke/heat detectors? I'm thinking of two scenarios - historic buildings and sleek contemporary dwellings. Are there any types that are smaller or less obtrusive than others?
Thanks
An aquantance of mine has his concealed very modestly by a tesco carrier bag, kind of defeats the point of it being there - but you definitely cant see the smoke detector !
-
mmmm. that sounds really pretty
-
it's the yellow insultating tape that holds it in place that really sets it off!
-
Hi Muggins,
If you are looking for discreet fire detection for graded historic or modern sleek buildings VESDA produce a very discreet capillary sampling points that can be unobtrusively integrated into the surrounding walls and ceilings with minimal visability from the sampling pipes. We have (yes being called VESDA Kev I do work for VESDA!) even had certain occasions where the small sampling points have even been altered to remain flush with the surrounding surface. Send me an email to my address below and I will be happy to soeak with you about how we can help proivde discrete protection.
Kevin Shea
kshea@xtralis.com
01442 206 429