Author Topic: Suitable detection for Hold Open Devices  (Read 9701 times)

Offline Mr. P

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Suitable detection for Hold Open Devices
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2008, 08:23:11 AM »
Wizs' link worked fine for me (took a little time), but you'll need one heck of clever can opener to open Wiz!

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Suitable detection for Hold Open Devices
« Reply #16 on: June 26, 2008, 10:57:19 AM »
Quote from: nearlythere
Quote from: Wiz
Quote from: nearlythere
Thanks Wiz. When you say you can direct me to then gadget can I see it on-line?
nearlythere, please click nearlyhere
Thanks Wiz. Was wondering how it fits in with

www.ucl.ac.uk/efd/maintenance/fire/documents/UCLFire_TN_016.pdf
Hi nearlythere,
As you know every organisation (and their dogs) seem to come up with their own set of written 'recommendations' these days. They are obviously quite entitled to do so when it covers something in their jurisdiction. The problem comes when you have to decide if those 'recommendations' are applicable or have any relevance to what you are doing.

The first document is from the Estates and Facilities department of the UCL. It could be argued that these 'recommendations' are only definitely applicable to UCL properties. Is this the case in your circumstances?
I've only 'scanned' the UCL document but I can see nothing in it that would prevent the use of my proposal and, in fact, it would meet the main purpose of this document's recommendations which appears to be to come up with a method to reduce the liklihood of doors being wedged open.

The second document is from the CACFOA and I couldn't say who is supposed to adhere to it's recommendations. Why do you think you might have to?
Again, I've only just scanned this document but the major stumbling blocks detailed in it to my proposal would appear to include parts of items 2 & 3 because these relate to a full fire alarm system and, as you know, my proposal was for something to work alongside the full fire alarm system.  Obviously people write these sort of documents with a narrow view of what people might want to do and can't include all the 'what if's'

I am also intrigued with item 4) of the CACFOA document and feel that it is an extremely poor explanation of the actual new recommendations produced after the studies mentioned.

In all events, I'm sure that it would be agreed by most people that all recommendations are exactly that and what you might have to do in any situation should actually be based on a mixture of the recommendations, an assessment of the situation in question and possibly any financial restrictions and vaild specific user requirments.

Please understand that my proposal was not something I was saying that 'you could definitely do' (what is these days?) but something that I felt might be possible taking into consideration your description of the actual situation and my understanding of the most important relevant recommendations.

Galeon's mention of the new BS for access controlled doors is also very valid.

Sorry but I won't be able to continue this thread because I've decided to leave this home for the slightly bewildered so this will be my last post. You asked me a question and I felt therefore  that I owed you an answer and not  to just disappear! (in a flash of light?)  
Regards and good luck
Wiz
p.s Matron is coming with me!

Offline nearlythere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4351
Suitable detection for Hold Open Devices
« Reply #17 on: June 26, 2008, 11:12:32 AM »
Quote from: Wiz
Quote from: nearlythere
Quote from: Wiz
nearlythere, please click nearlyhere
Thanks Wiz. Was wondering how it fits in with

www.ucl.ac.uk/efd/maintenance/fire/documents/UCLFire_TN_016.pdf
Hi nearlythere,
As you know every organisation (and their dogs) seem to come up with their own set of written 'recommendations' these days. They are obviously quite entitled to do so when it covers something in their jurisdiction. The problem comes when you have to decide if those 'recommendations' are applicable or have any relevance to what you are doing.

The first document is from the Estates and Facilities department of the UCL. It could be argued that these 'recommendations' are only definitely applicable to UCL properties. Is this the case in your circumstances?
I've only 'scanned' the UCL document but I can see nothing in it that would prevent the use of my proposal and, in fact, it would meet the main purpose of this document's recommendations which appears to be to come up with a method to reduce the liklihood of doors being wedged open.

The second document is from the CACFOA and I couldn't say who is supposed to adhere to it's recommendations. Why do you think you might have to?
Again, I've only just scanned this document but the major stumbling blocks detailed in it to my proposal would appear to include parts of items 2 & 3 because these relate to a full fire alarm system and, as you know, my proposal was for something to work alongside the full fire alarm system.  Obviously people write these sort of documents with a narrow view of what people might want to do and can't include all the 'what if's'

I am also intrigued with item 4) of the CACFOA document and feel that it is an extremely poor explanation of the actual new recommendations produced after the studies mentioned.

In all events, I'm sure that it would be agreed by most people that all recommendations are exactly that and what you might have to do in any situation should actually be based on a mixture of the recommendations, an assessment of the situation in question and possibly any financial restrictions and vaild specific user requirments.

Please understand that my proposal was not something I was saying that 'you could definitely do' (what is these days?) but something that I felt might be possible taking into consideration your description of the actual situation and my understanding of the most important relevant recommendations.

Galeon's mention of the new BS for access controlled doors is also very valid.

Sorry but I won't be able to continue this thread because I've decided to leave this home for the slightly bewildered so this will be my last post. You asked me a question and I felt therefore  that I owed you an answer and not  to just disappear! (in a flash of light?)  
Regards and good luck
Wiz
p.s Matron is coming with me!
Hope it wasn't something I said?

Good luck.
We're not Brazil we're Northern Ireland.