Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this paper is to justify the introduction of changes to existing international standards covering optical smoke fire detectors, which utilise sensitivity fluctuation compensation mechanisms.
Introduction: Improving the quality of optical smoke fire detectors is not possible without the incorporation of a responsiveness fluctuation compensation mechanism. Current documentation EN 54-1 and EN 54-7, dealing with normative issues, does not contain necessary definitions, technical requirements and details concerning methods of control. These omissions present problems with the development and improvement of optical smoke detectors. The article illustrates a design of a test smoke flue for an optical smoke detector and includes the main construction principles of fire smoke detectors. It also highlights the dependence of photo detector signals on the optical density of air. The article includes a range of questions: What is “sensitivity of an optical smoke sensor”? What is “sensitivity fluctuation” and how is it associated with “contamination”? What is “fluctuation compensation” and “compensation fluctuation boundary”?
Methodology: Analysis of mathematical calculations concerning receiver output signal levels of the optical sensor, in relation to specific optical density of air. Analysis of technical requirements and control methods for fire detectors, which incorporate sensitivity fluctuation compensation.
Results: Identified the influence of smoke detector chamber contamination on the performance of the detectors’ sensor. Undertook to improve the accuracy of measurements performed in the smoke detector flue chamber. Described the requirement for a multi-mode detector with sensitivity fluctuation compensation, to include at least two diode indicators, coloured red and yellow. When a multi-mode detector achieves a ‘boundary’ reading for its sensitivity fluctuation compensation, the system should generate, at the signal exit point, information, which is relayed to the control centre, indicating a “sensor malfunction”, which in turn should not ‘disrupt’ the flow of signals indicating “fire” from any other sensor linked to the same fire detection circuit.
Conclusions: Sensitivity test of the detector flue cannot replace fire test checks. Without high stability and recurrence of sensitivity at a value of 0.1 dB / m it is pointless to bother with fluctuation compensation for detectors. For detectors with a sensitivity fluctuation compensation, it is necessary to improve the accuracy of sensor responsiveness in the flue chamber. There is a need to enhance EN 54-7 with new provisions, technical specifications and control mechanisms for multi-mode detectors with sensitivity fluctuation compensation.
Keywords: Tyndall effect, specific optical density, fluctuation compensation, test fires, standard EN 54-7
Type of article: review article