Suitable detection for Hold Open Devices

[nearlythere]

I have a client who manages a small 4 bed residential care respite facility for young persons.

The staff are persistantly propping open fire doors to the only corridor one being to a domestic size kitchen. The client would prefer to have an open door policy anyway thus providing a more homely less establishment type environment for the children.

We have discussed the provision of hold open devices to rooms containg smoke detection but have the usual problem with a HOD on the kitchen/dining door.

The kitchen contains a heat detector which I don't consider suitable for a HOD. Is there a suitable type of smoke detector which may suit a HOD on the kitchen door. The kitchen is domestic size with no deep fay frying. Contains toaster and dishwasher. Cooker provided with extraction hood.

Rather than try to resolve by increasing the level of extraction we would prefer a technological solution involving the AFD.
Any ideas from you techno-types out there?

[Wiz]

I have a client who manages a small 4 bed residential care respite facility for young persons.

The staff are persistantly propping open fire doors to the only corridor one being to a domestic size kitchen. The client would prefer to have an open door policy anyway thus providing a more homely less establishment type environment for the children.

We have discussed the provision of hold open devices to rooms containg smoke detection but have the usual problem with a HOD on the kitchen/dining door.

The kitchen contains a heat detector which I don't consider suitable for a HOD. Is there a suitable type of smoke detector which may suit a HOD on the kitchen door. The kitchen is domestic size with no deep fay frying. Contains toaster and dishwasher. Cooker provided with extraction hood.

Rather than try to resolve by increasing the level of extraction we would prefer a technological solution involving the AFD.
Any ideas from you techno-types out there?

Nearlythere, I don't know of any automatic detector that will give you any faster warning than the heat detector that is installed apart, of course, from a smoke detector. All the smoke detectors I am aware of will operate to one or the other effect caused by the cooking/washing in this area.

You obviously also understand that any open door policy is possibly going to give you problems with other smoke detectors installed elswhere in the area.

Could a solution be to leave the existing fire alarm system as it is and then add (but not to the existing system) a further smoke detector in the kitchen solely to release the hold open device? This will possibly give the option of closing the kitchen door quickly in the event of too much normal kitchen-use smoke-like effects, thereby possibly preventing some unwanted alarms, but with all the original fire detection elements still in place.

If this is a solution that you might consider, I can direct you to a gadget that provides power to the door holder and is provided with  a monitored connection for a 'proper' smoke detector (that will disconnect the power to the door hold on fire operation) and it costs less than 40 squid. This would give you a possible standalone solution.

I apologise, to those that complain, if my post is long-winded, but I initially tried writing it and missing out every other word, but it made even less sense than it does now.

[nearlythere]

I have a client who manages a small 4 bed residential care respite facility for young persons.

The staff are persistantly propping open fire doors to the only corridor one being to a domestic size kitchen. The client would prefer to have an open door policy anyway thus providing a more homely less establishment type environment for the children.

We have discussed the provision of hold open devices to rooms containg smoke detection but have the usual problem with a HOD on the kitchen/dining door.

The kitchen contains a heat detector which I don't consider suitable for a HOD. Is there a suitable type of smoke detector which may suit a HOD on the kitchen door. The kitchen is domestic size with no deep fay frying. Contains toaster and dishwasher. Cooker provided with extraction hood.

Rather than try to resolve by increasing the level of extraction we would prefer a technological solution involving the AFD.
Any ideas from you techno-types out there?

Nearlythere, I don't know of any automatic detector that will give you any faster warning than the heat detector that is installed apart, of course, from a smoke detector. All the smoke detectors I am aware of will operate to one or the other effect caused by the cooking/washing in this area.

You obviously also understand that any open door policy is possibly going to give you problems with other smoke detectors installed elswhere in the area.

Could a solution be to leave the existing fire alarm system as it is and then add a further smoke detector in the kitchen solely to release the hold open device? This will possibly give the option of closing the kitchen door quickly in the event of too much normal kitchen-use smoke-like effects, thereby possibly preventing some unwanted alarms, but with all the original fire detection elements still in place.

If this is a solution that you might consider, I can direct you to a gadget that provides power to the door holder and is provided with  a monitored connection for a 'proper' smoke detector (that will disconnet the power to the door hold on fire operation) and it costs less than 40 squid. This would give you a possible standalone solution.

I apologise, to those that complain, if my post is long-winded, but I initially tried writing it and missing out every other word, but it made even less sense than it does now.

Wiz. Are you saying that your gadget will be an additonal device on the alarm system. Why would the gadget not be sensitive to the normal cooking steam and smoke?
From my interpretation of Chief Fire Officers Association policy it does not permit HODs operable by heat detectors nor stand alone smoke detectors. Thats he problem I am trying to circumnavigate?

[Wiz]

I have a client who manages a small 4 bed residential care respite facility for young persons.

The staff are persistantly propping open fire doors to the only corridor one being to a domestic size kitchen. The client would prefer to have an open door policy anyway thus providing a more homely less establishment type environment for the children.

We have discussed the provision of hold open devices to rooms containg smoke detection but have the usual problem with a HOD on the kitchen/dining door.

The kitchen contains a heat detector which I don't consider suitable for a HOD. Is there a suitable type of smoke detector which may suit a HOD on the kitchen door. The kitchen is domestic size with no deep fay frying. Contains toaster and dishwasher. Cooker provided with extraction hood.

Rather than try to resolve by increasing the level of extraction we would prefer a technological solution involving the AFD.
Any ideas from you techno-types out there?

Nearlythere, I don't know of any automatic detector that will give you any faster warning than the heat detector that is installed apart, of course, from a smoke detector. All the smoke detectors I am aware of will operate to one or the other effect caused by the cooking/washing in this area.

You obviously also understand that any open door policy is possibly going to give you problems with other smoke detectors installed elswhere in the area.

Could a solution be to leave the existing fire alarm system as it is and then add a further smoke detector in the kitchen solely to release the hold open device? This will possibly give the option of closing the kitchen door quickly in the event of too much normal kitchen-use smoke-like effects, thereby possibly preventing some unwanted alarms, but with all the original fire detection elements still in place.

If this is a solution that you might consider, I can direct you to a gadget that provides power to the door holder and is provided with  a monitored connection for a 'proper' smoke detector (that will disconnet the power to the door hold on fire operation) and it costs less than 40 squid. This would give you a possible standalone solution.

I apologise, to those that complain, if my post is long-winded, but I initially tried writing it and missing out every other word, but it made even less sense than it does now.

Wiz. Are you saying that your gadget will be an additonal device on the alarm system. Why would the gadget not be sensitive to the normal cooking steam and smoke?
From my interpretation of Chief Fire Officers Association policy it does not permit HODs operable by heat detectors nor stand alone smoke detectors. Thats he problem I am trying to circumnavigate?

The smoke detector I am talking about is an additional device and on it's own system. Hopefully this meets the requirement for not depending on a heat detector to release the held open door.

It will still be subject to the normal causes of unwanted alarms but will only release the held open door when it operates and not initiate the full fire alarm. Hopefully, the door being closed will now stop those causes reaching the next nearest smoke detector and giving a full unwanted fire condition.

Obviously in a proper fire condition from the kitchen, the door will probably close due the the smoke detector. but the kitchen still has the detection coverage originally provided by the heat detector and which will (hopefully) initiate the 'main' system as normal.

My proposal hopefully allows a hold open device to be fitted to a kitchen door but reduce the number of unwanted alarms from those smoke detectors outside but near the kitchen because the door is open. The door might close quite often when cooking in the kitchen, but this might be considered a minor inconvenience if the door can be left held open at other times

[nearlythere]

Thanks Wiz. When you say you can direct me to then gadget can I see it on-line?

[afterburner]

comment on this situation. As part of one of our prisons we have a few specialised units for prisoners approaching end of sentence to acquire skills of living in a non-institutionalised environment. These specialised units are in effect terraced houses which are communally occupied by a small group of such prisoners.
The Units are single staircase with sleeping accommodation on the first floor, Kitchen / laundry and living room on the ground floor. There is a very strong impetus to provide as near 'normal' accommodation as possible. Our Enforcing Authority Inspector and I have independently required full automatic detection throughout the Unit and the kitchen door to maintained effectively self closing at all times.
Naturally this flew directly in the opposite direction to the concept of 'normal accommodation' but at the end of all teh discussions it was found that the occupants were still owed a duty of care by the process of lawful custody and that duty of care over-rode the 'normalisation' factor.
The next question was an automatic hold open / relase device. we could not find one which we would be happy with in terms of rapid release or false alarm rate considerations. so the kitchen door is a 'fire door keep closed' affair.
It's not an ideal answer because we are aware that abuse through 'wedging' goes on.  
Will follow this thread with interest to what solutions could arise that we've not explored.

[Wiz]

Thanks Wiz. When you say you can direct me to then gadget can I see it on-line?

nearlythere, please click nearlyhere

[Chris Houston]

comment on this situation. As part of one of our prisons we have a few specialised units for prisoners approaching end of sentence to acquire skills of living in a non-institutionalised environment. These specialised units are in effect terraced houses which are communally occupied by a small group of such prisoners.
The Units are single staircase with sleeping accommodation on the first floor, Kitchen / laundry and living room on the ground floor. There is a very strong impetus to provide as near 'normal' accommodation as possible. Our Enforcing Authority Inspector and I have independently required full automatic detection throughout the Unit and the kitchen door to maintained effectively self closing at all times.
Naturally this flew directly in the opposite direction to the concept of 'normal accommodation' but at the end of all teh discussions it was found that the occupants were still owed a duty of care by the process of lawful custody and that duty of care over-rode the 'normalisation' factor.
The next question was an automatic hold open / relase device. we could not find one which we would be happy with in terms of rapid release or false alarm rate considerations. so the kitchen door is a 'fire door keep closed' affair.
It's not an ideal answer because we are aware that abuse through 'wedging' goes on.  
Will follow this thread with interest to what solutions could arise that we've not explored.

I was about to suggest to the original poster that the obvious solution seemed to be to hold them all open except the kitchen door, but then I read it was kids in there and having been to such environments, I know the importance of having doors open for fluffy emotional reasons is important to them.  Then Wiz posted what appears to be the best solution.  I think the prisoners are more used to shut doors and won't be too upset with having to open one to get to a kitchen.

If prisoners are breaching rules while in the last few weeks of their sentence, just stick 'em back in the main block and add a few weeks.  That should prevent any "wedging".  Are they not educated about the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order as part of their rehabilitation

[nearlythere]

Thanks Wiz. When you say you can direct me to then gadget can I see it on-line?

nearlythere, please click nearlyhere

Can't open Wiz. Link error. What is this site? Can anyone else open it?

[Chris Houston]

Doesn't work for me.

[Wiz]

Thanks Wiz. When you say you can direct me to then gadget can I see it on-line?

nearlythere, please click nearlyhere

Can't open Wiz. Link error. What is this site? Can anyone else open it?

What made you think you could open Wiz?

I hope to have fixed the link now. It is a pdf file that originates from Australia so it might take some time to download depending on the current weather conditions. Please return to my original post (No. 7) and try clicking again.

[Martin]

Try

http://www.c-tec.co.uk/Products/alarmancill.htm

[Wiz]

Try

http://www.c-tec.co.uk/Products/alarmancill.htm

Martin, yes this is a similar product that works in the same way but it is more expensive. Also the version highlighted comes as a standard kit including door holder and two detectors. My proposal is cheaper and you can choose your own holders and detectors and also have only one detector if you require. (as might be the case for this specific enquiry)

[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

[Galeon]

'Rather than try to resolve by increasing the level of extraction we would prefer a technological solution involving the AFD.
Any ideas from you techno-types out there? '

The answer to this problem , you have already given , there is no point trying to engineer a solution with the fire detection . Please be careful as we have already discussed the new BS in relation to door hold open devices.
Your extraction system needs to be engineered so to not impact on the fire system.