Heat or Smoke detection in hotels?

[PhilB]

From other posts we know that many FRS are now requiring hotels to upgrade their fire alarm systems. Are you recommending heat or smoke detection for hotel bedrooms?

Could one argue that there is the potential to increase unwanted fire signals and thereby reduce the effectiveness of the systems if smoke detection is used?

The old lilac guide recommended heat detection in bedrooms for good reason.

[CivvyFSO]

The problem I can see with HD is that it is not very effective for the person sleeping in the room, and they are a relevant person.

[PhilB]

But the purpose of the detection is not to warn the person in the room. It is to warn others before the escape routes are compromised.

That was why the old L3/L2 standard was changed in the late 8os. It was found that detection in corridors only was ineffective as the smoke had cooled and was filling escape routes from the bottom up, so by the time the detectors operated the corridors were full of smoke. It never was about warning the person in the room.

Yes the person in the room is a relevant person but he should be aware of a fire without the need for a detector.

[CivvyFSO]

When he is asleep?

[PhilB]

Yes!!!! Do you have a smoke detector in all your bedrooms??

[Pip]

Yes!!!! Do you have a smoke detector in all your bedrooms??

Yes I do !!
Although the original intent may have been as PhilB suggests,I don't think it would wash in a court of law now

[PhilB]

Well you're very safe Pip you must sleep very soundly but its usually not needed in bedrooms. Do some reserach and look into why the BS5839 was amended.

Why would it not wash in a court of law? That has been the recommended standard for the past 20 years and it has worked.

[John Webb]

PhilB mentions changes in the L2/L3 standard in the late 1980s. I am fairly certain these resulted from work I and others at Fire Research did on the spacing of detectors in corridors. The principle problem was that with a FR door, smoke formed a plug in the corridor in the vicinity of the door as fire gases were considerably cooled by their passage through the door to frame/stops gap. If this happened between detectors in the corridor, then the plug could thicken to a considerable density well above the maximum level through which people might be willing to try and escape.
Because the severity of fire in the room of origin would have meant that any person in the room would have died, it was recommended that heat detection be put in each room to raise the alarm before escape for others was affected. At the time it was considered that the risk of false alarms from a smoke detector in each bedroom was too high. (And the cost aspect of smoke detection was also a consideration.)
Perhaps with modern multi-element detectors the FA problem is considerably reduced - and fast-response sprinklers also provide an alternative which could additionally save the life of the room of origin occupant.

[PhilB]

Quite So John with modern detection the false alarms can be reduced but there will still be many. Also as hotels are upgrading they often cut cost of upgrade by only using short spurs of cabling into the rooms. Therefore detectors are often found just a few feet inside the door slap bang outside the bathroom.

If IOs demand smoke detection I believe they will infact be increasing the risk by increasing the false alarms and thereby reducing effectiveness of the systems that will inceasingly be ignored by guests fed up with sleepless nights.

[CivvyFSO]

Quite So John with modern detection the false alarms can be reduced but there will still be many. Also as hotels are upgrading they often cut cost of upgrade by only using short spurs of cabling into the rooms. Therefore detectors are often found just a few feet inside the door slap bang outside the bathroom.

Indeed, generally right next to the bathroom door. Hello steam.

[Pip]

Fire service recommends sd in bedrooms-and fits them,on home risk assessments,why should the ethos be different in a hotel bedroom?

[Gel]

One reason not to treat the same is that most hotel rooms will have a kettle, whereas most bedrooms  don't, unless they have one of those old Goblin tea makers!!

[PhilB]

Fire service recommends sd in bedrooms-and fits them,on home risk assessments,why should the ethos be different in a hotel bedroom?

Presumably you are targetting vunerable groups. The ethos should be different for all the reasons stated before, essentially to prevent UWFS.

[CivvyFSO]

Sprinkler it damn you

[Pip]

even under the old regime of certificates,in my area policy was we reccommended sd in all hotel rooms,it is still the same today, with a 90 sec delay in transmission of alert to enable staff to check,thus reducing false AFA calls to the Fire Service.