first stage alarm

[lucky]

Oh Wiz you  gonn an done it agin,you are wasted on this forum,you deserve better.........



If I have offended anyone please accept my apology,my views do not reflect those of my Keepers,Carers or Employers who have there own views which I would not chalenge on this forum.

[Wiz]

So it seems they just held you to the spec word for word and the system you provided was a variation to their spec and to the BS5839 part 1.  What did you ask your supplier to provide? You could have some comeback if you handed their spec to your supplier.

Spot on, Special K.

Ron, I can't see anything in the outline spec. you have provided from your customer that looks like it should be recorded as a Variation specifically. If you are looking for other variations in their spec. to use as an argument that your variation should also be accepted I would advise that this is probably not likely to prove anything much.  I am pretty sure that this is a standard spec. for requirements at this shopping centre that has been pre-agreed by all relevant parties and is probably also included in the rental agreements that all prospective tenents agree to.

Unfortunately, the simple fact appears to be that the equipment you have provided cannot meet the spec. and unless the relevant parties agreed the difference in operation of your system as a Variation, then it does not comply to BS5839 2002 Part 1 which was clearly stated as a requirement in the spec. Sorry mate.

[Wiz]

Oh Wiz you  gonn an done it agin,you are wasted on this forum,you deserve better.........

Lucky, me old mate. You can't get rid of me that easily.

I agree that I am often 'wasted', but very rarely whilst on this forum.

I don't know what I have supposed to have done. But that is really no surprise...

There are three types of people in this world;

Those that make things happen...

Those that watch things happen....

And those that wonder what the F**k happened!

I place myself firmly in the last group.

[Ron Winwood]

Thanks everyone - So does my confused little brain tell me that the Rafiki sita plus panel does not comply
with BS after they assured me it does

Ron

[kurnal]

Thats the bottom line Ron but if chasing them you will have to explain why -  and the reasons are as explained  by the wizard.

[Wiz]

Ron,
I'm sure I've made this clear before, but I would be pretty certain that the Rafiki panel complies with BS in itself. However the way (panel programme configuration) you are using it, i.e with the panel configured to operate in a manner complying with one of the recommendations of Part 6, does not comply with the recommendations of Part 1. If you were to reconfigure it to do away with the Part 6 function then it would comply with Part 1. However, I suspect, that if you do this, it won't be able to achieve one of the requirements (I'm guessing it is two stage operation) of the specification required for your particular project.

[Ron Winwood]

Thanks Wiz
I got Rafiki to contact the company who failed our system - Rafiki rang me back to say it could not be programmed to meet his needs,
I am getting even more confused now because the panel can do what it requested on the spec i sent
to them -  could it be a variation that should have been mentioned

Ron

[Graeme]

If the panel can do what you asked for then you did not get what you asked for in the first place and you should take that up with them regarding all the grey hairs and sleepless nights they have casued you.

However
 
Smirnoff and Berkley send their thanks.

[Ron Winwood]

Cheers graeme - i have had to read your comment 6 times before it sank in - thats how bad it is.
does anybody know of a site with BS 2002 part 1 etc - word for word - until ive saved my pocket
money up for another set
Ron

[Ron Winwood]

By the way buy some shares from benson & hedges and tennants super - smirnoff is having no effect

[Graeme]

tennants super - smirnoff is having no effect

drink it fast through a straw.

[Wiz]

does anybody know of a site with BS 2002 part 1 etc - word for word - until ive saved my pocket
money up for another set
Ron

Ron,
The BSI would sue anyone who reproduced their documents in a format that enabled people to get a copy without paying the BS charges. I have heard of some people who go to a larger library who are likely to stock most BS's as a refence document and use the photocopying machine at the library to make a copy. At 10p a sheet this would still be an expensive process but much much less than buying a copy from BSI. Please note however that what these people are doing is totally ILLEGAL and I am not suggesting anyone should follow their methods!

With respect to your problem, if you originally showed Rafiki, or whoever suggested that panel, the specification which you have listed elsewhere on this question, then they should have known that it couldn't comply with the specification. This may be your only way of finding someone to blame.

For your next job, please remember the advice I gave you previously - Always only use  well-known 'open protocol' equipment ( i.e. Apollo or Hochiki etc.) because this gives you more flexibility between the dozens of panel manufacturers that use that protocol. The smooth-talking salesmen of 'closed protocol' products are nowhere to be found when it turns out their product doesn't do what it should, or has annoying fault glitches, or is found to be horrendously expensive to maintain over the years. Thousands of people have had to learn this lesson the hard way over the years.

[Ron Winwood]

Cheers Wiz - i must admit your right on open protocol - i recently replaced an old TANN system in a nursing home (200+ detectors) - using a MORLEY panel and Hotchiki Detectors
without any problems ( apart from 2 x pyros being slightly down ),
Without the risk of going into a long winded battle - im a bit stuck - with risk of me repeating myself at what part is RAFIKI wrong they keep assuring me the equipment does meet BS and that the panel does everything mentioned on the spec, i downloaded earlier - with theexception of the extended first stage part,
The point i keep harping on about is should the spec mention prolonged first stage - because
if i had known i would have quoted for a more expensive system.
I dont believe in cutting corners - the system i put in used only 8 detectors ( and that was over the top)
I am not looking for anyone to agree with me if im wrong - but is it a variation or not

Many thanks
Ron

[Graeme]

i would say no as a variation should be an intentional engineering justification not one that was overlooked or in error.

As your panel can do what you originally asked for but you got another by error then it's not a variation.

[Graeme]

Totally agree with Wiz on the use of Open protocol systems.