Two FASs in the same building, but not linked!

[Benzerari]

Two fire alarm systems in the same building one by entrance and one by the back exit, it has only a ground floor, it has offices in front and (restaurant, kitchen, dinning area... ) in the back, (150m * 100m) of surface, the two fire alarm systems are not linked at all, but both of them affect the fire doors to close in fire condition.

The question is, is it really right to keep both systems not linked?

They have both been installed more than 15 years ago!

Thank you

[Allen Higginson]

Strange scenario right enough but easily rectified with a panel upgrade and minimal cabling.
Can't for the life of me see why a single panel wasn't used but going by the building floor area of 15000m2 then there should be 8 zones should there not?

[kurnal]

Two fire alarm systems in the same building one by entrance and one by the back exit, it has only a ground floor, it has offices in front and (restaurant, kitchen, dinning area... ) in the back, (150m * 100m) of surface, the two fire alarm systems are not linked at all, but both of them affect the fire doors to closed in fire condition.

The question is, is it really right to keep both systems not linked?

They have both been installed more than 15 years ago!

Thank you

No Benz it doesn't make sense at all unless the two sides of the building are entirely separated from each other by compartment walls. It sounds like an accident waiting to happen. The systems should be linked together or amalgamated into a single system to cover the whole building

[Benzerari]

Any design old enough may look actually strange..., either because of:

1- The old installer had charged his customer unnecessary extra money…etc
2- Things keep progressing... so what was fine in the past wouldn't necessarily be for ever

Both systems have been fitted more than 15 years ago...; indeed one simple system would do the job... etc

The strange thing is that, each panel has (2 * 12Vdc, 17Ah) to feed just less than 10 conventional devices... ?

[kurnal]

Even going back to the earliest days of fire alarm standards, there has always been a requirement that a fire alarm system should cover the entire building or compartment.

[GregC]

Was probaly compartmented and seperate users, so it would have made sense then.

As with most systems and buildings, people uprgrade, change the use and never think about the fire alarms, they then shoot the messanger who tells them its going to cost to put it right.

[Wiz]

When 'linking' two seperate fire alarm systems installed within the same building, some thought would need to be given as to the 'integrity' of such a link.

The overall 'linked' system would surely need to be of a standard of integrity equal to a single system installed throughout the building.

This integrity would include such things as type of linking cables used, monitoring of such cables and the effect to the system of any faults to the link cables.

Consideration should also be given to practical aspects of the effect of linking, such as clear indication on both panels as to the origin of fire and fault conditions, and the effect of operating controls on one or the other control panels.

I would say that having two seperate systems in one premises is rarely a good idea, even when they are 'linked' in some way, unless such 'linking' is by a method specifically designed for that purpose by the equipment manufacturers.

[Big_Fella]

When 'linking' two seperate fire alarm systems installed within the same building, some thought would need to be given as to the 'integrity' of such a link.

The overall 'linked' system would surely need to be of a standard of integrity equal to a single system installed throughout the building.

This integrity would include such things as type of linking cables used, monitoring of such cables and the effect to the system of any faults to the link cables.

Consideration should also be given to practical aspects of the effect of linking, such as clear indication on both panels as to the origin of fire and fault conditions, and the effect of operating controls on one or the other control panels.

Two seperate systems in one premises is rarely a good idea, even when they are 'linked' in some way unless that linking is by a method specifically designed for that purpose by the equipment manufacturers.

Given that thought... Take for example shopping centres where individual shop units systems are to be linked to the landlords system and vice versa to cause evacuation, often staged, i.e. evacuation of shop units either side and maybe alert via pulsed sounders other units for example.

When taking about monitoring it is often normal practice to link into a shop unit via the class change input, as more than not the shop unit usually will have a conventional fire alarm system.  This is done via  relay from the landlords system.  This isn't monitored, and is used for evacuation purposes.  

Taking this to the next level I would now question weather this should be done like this?

[Midland Retty]

Agreed Wiz

By far the best solution in my opinion would be to install one new panel to cover the whole building.

As Greg C points perhaps there had been seperate occupancies in the past that have lead to this anomoly.

[Allen Higginson]

When 'linking' two seperate fire alarm systems installed within the same building, some thought would need to be given as to the 'integrity' of such a link.

The overall 'linked' system would surely need to be of a standard of integrity equal to a single system installed throughout the building.

This integrity would include such things as type of linking cables used, monitoring of such cables and the effect to the system of any faults to the link cables.

Consideration should also be given to practical aspects of the effect of linking, such as clear indication on both panels as to the origin of fire and fault conditions, and the effect of operating controls on one or the other control panels.

Two seperate systems in one premises is rarely a good idea, even when they are 'linked' in some way unless that linking is by a method specifically designed for that purpose by the equipment manufacturers.

Given that thought... Take for example shopping centres where individual shop units systems are to be linked to the landlords system and vice versa to cause evacuation, often staged, i.e. evacuation of shop units either side and maybe alert via pulsed sounders other units for example.

When taking about monitoring it is often normal practice to link into a shop unit via the class change input, as more than not the shop unit usually will have a conventional fire alarm system.  This is done via  relay from the landlords system.  This isn't monitored, and is used for evacuation purposes.  

Taking this to the next level I would now question weather this should be done like this?

This was certainly the way it had been done previously but  I use a monitored programmable input (either addressable or non-addressable).
On an older system with non-monitored class change you can monitor it up to the relay coil.

[Wiz]

When 'linking' two seperate fire alarm systems installed within the same building, some thought would need to be given as to the 'integrity' of such a link.

The overall 'linked' system would surely need to be of a standard of integrity equal to a single system installed throughout the building.

This integrity would include such things as type of linking cables used, monitoring of such cables and the effect to the system of any faults to the link cables.

Consideration should also be given to practical aspects of the effect of linking, such as clear indication on both panels as to the origin of fire and fault conditions, and the effect of operating controls on one or the other control panels.

Two seperate systems in one premises is rarely a good idea, even when they are 'linked' in some way unless that linking is by a method specifically designed for that purpose by the equipment manufacturers.

Given that thought... Take for example shopping centres where individual shop units systems are to be linked to the landlords system and vice versa to cause evacuation, often staged, i.e. evacuation of shop units either side and maybe alert via pulsed sounders other units for example.

When taking about monitoring it is often normal practice to link into a shop unit via the class change input, as more than not the shop unit usually will have a conventional fire alarm system.  This is done via  relay from the landlords system.  This isn't monitored, and is used for evacuation purposes.  

Taking this to the next level I would now question weather this should be done like this?

A fair comment Big Fella.

However, I think the shopping centre scenario is maybe a little different in as much as you have a number of small systems enveloped within a large overall system.

If this type of system failed to the extent that one of the units didn't transmit/receive signals properly it wouldn't be the end of the world.

However, If you had a building where the failure affected 50% of it, then the potential for serious problems is far greater.

In respect of the actual scenario you talk about, the centre really should insist that shop units have a panel that has a monitored input (i.e. a non-latching zone input) to reduce the risk of losing a link.

[Benzerari]

The building in fact is in a prison, but out side..., the offices are for prison's staff, and the dinning area is for the visitors, but all of them use the same entrance and back exit, the building is been like that, since it's been built... etc, by means the systems as well !

Strange !

[kurnal]

What will you do Benz? Will you make any comment over the arrangement? Or will you just service it and say nothing?

PS if you can pinch a pair of handcuffs whilst you are there Matron is looking for a pair so that she can stop wiz running away before the job is done.

[Benzerari]

What will you do Benz? Will you make any comment over the arrangement? Or will you just service it and say nothing?

PS if you can pinch a pair of handcuffs whilst you are there Matron is looking for a pair so that she can stop wiz running away before the job is done.

If I say some thing, they will handcuff me, but I wouldn't do it, otherwise 'Wiz' would be the first to feel happy, as he will no longer see my posts :lol:

[Wiz]

What will you do Benz? Will you make any comment over the arrangement? Or will you just service it and say nothing?

PS if you can pinch a pair of handcuffs whilst you are there Matron is looking for a pair so that she can stop wiz running away before the job is done.

If I say some thing, they will handcuff me, but I wouldn't do it, otherwise 'Wiz' would be the first to feel happy, as he will no longer see my posts :lol:

I love your posts Benz. I spend many a happy hour trying to decipher them. It's more challenging than the Times crossword