Author Topic: Kitchen Suppression Systems  (Read 7311 times)

jakespop

  • Guest
Kitchen Suppression Systems
« on: July 19, 2011, 11:36:39 AM »
We are being asked to replace existing suppression system by maintenance company due to age of system. I cannot find anything in Firecode to require such a system. Anyone know any diffferent or have opinions?

Offline David Rooney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 891
    • http://ctafire.co.uk
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2011, 12:00:07 PM »
I don't think there is anything to say you have to have a suppression system. It's normally the requirement of an Insurance agent or risk assessment.

I think the two front runners in the industry are Ansul and Amerex (we do Amerex :) ) Amerex generally being a bit cheaper.

CTA Fire - BAFE SP203 - F Gas Accredited - Wireless Fire Alarm System Specialists - Established 1985 - www.ctafire.co.uk
Natural Born Cynic

Offline Colin Newman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
    • Healthfire
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2011, 02:31:17 PM »
If the kitchen you refer to was considered to be a "Hospital Main Kitchen", the Firecode guidance in Fire Practice Note 4 may have been applied which recommended:

"automatically-operated, fixed fire-fighting systems... for all new installations of deep fat-fryers havng oil or fat capacities exceeding 10 litres"

jakespop

  • Guest
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2011, 02:44:36 PM »
Thanks CN. That could well be the case. I cannot see that this note has been superseded, is it still current?

Offline nearlythere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4351
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2011, 02:50:41 PM »
If the kitchen you refer to was considered to be a "Hospital Main Kitchen", the Firecode guidance in Fire Practice Note 4 may have been applied which recommended:

"automatically-operated, fixed fire-fighting systems... for all new installations of deep fat-fryers havng oil or fat capacities exceeding 10 litres"
Is that per appliance?
We're not Brazil we're Northern Ireland.

jakespop

  • Guest
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2011, 02:54:55 PM »
" This recommendation applies whether the quoted capacity is contained within a single appliance or is the aggregate figure represented by a number of adjacent appliances."

Offline Psuedonym

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2011, 06:22:19 PM »
We are being asked to replace existing suppression system by maintenance company due to age of system. I cannot find anything in Firecode to require such a system. Anyone know any diffferent or have opinions?
Age?!?
Which compiance regulation are your maintenance company referring to with the replacement advice? Unless kit cannot be maintained due to lack of (eg Ansul R101 - powder) spares or parts required follwing a discharge or to comply with manufacturer maintenance schedule requirements, then as long as a system complies with the manufactures' requirements when serviced there should not be an issue with age.
Are they advising a new system be installed as upgrading a current system would not be cost effective?
Are they an authorised dealer in suppression systems?

I would get a second opinon. The manfacturer will be able to provide authorised dealers (and advice) who will provide a survey and fault report.

Let me know if you need any contact details for your manufacturer and I will forward you their details.
 
Ansul R102 Kitchen Suppression Enthusiast


Created using refurbished electrons to ensure I do my bit to save the planet...Polar bear cubs saved so far:2.75. Reduced due to effects of Carbon Footprint on the carpet. It's a bugger to shift...

Offline Colin Newman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
    • Healthfire
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2011, 06:51:28 PM »
Fire Practice Note 4 was published in 1994, it was never superseded but it was withdrawn when the Firecode suite of documents was updated as the HTM 05 series.  

It was decided at the time that very few hospitals still retained a main kitchen in the form that used to provide meals for patients, visitors and staff alike, and that general guidance that was available at the time was sufficient to deal with the risks associated with modern catering facilities.

N.T. the 10 L capacity figure applies to either the capacity of a single appliance or the aggregate capacity represented by a number of adjacent appliances.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2011, 06:55:29 PM by Colin Newman »

Offline nearlythere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4351
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2011, 07:09:49 PM »
Fire Practice Note 4 was published in 1994, it was never superseded but it was withdrawn when the Firecode suite of documents was updated as the HTM 05 series.  

It was decided at the time that very few hospitals still retained a main kitchen in the form that used to provide meals for patients, visitors and staff alike, and that general guidance that was available at the time was sufficient to deal with the risks associated with modern catering facilities.

N.T. the 10 L capacity figure applies to either the capacity of a single appliance or the aggregate capacity represented by a number of adjacent appliances.
Sorry to be pedantic but is "adjacent"  an relevant word here?
We're not Brazil we're Northern Ireland.

Offline Colin Newman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
    • Healthfire
Re: Kitchen Suppression Systems
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2011, 08:47:55 AM »
Yes "adjacent" is relevant in so far as calculating the aggregate 10 litre capacity. 

If the kitchen is fitted with two 5 littre fryers which are at opposite ends of the kitchen, then they are not aggregated to 10 litres which would require a fixed extinguishing system.

I believe that the authors of FPN4 were of the opinion that if the capacity of one fryer, or a number of fryers that would potentially be involved in the early stages of the same fire, was greater than 10 litres the risk was significant enough to warrant fixed extinguishing, if the capacity was less than 10 litres, the risk was considerably smaller.

I don't think that the 10 litres criteria is much more than an arbitary figure, I am not aware of any research carried out by DH which demonstrates that anything significant in fire terms occurs at the transition between 9 litres of oil or fat, and 11 litres of oil or fat.