Fire Brigade advice

[tazz]

Really????

yes...pipes, tray, aircon, vents, light fittings would all be guess work....

 

[Guest666]

yes...pipes, tray, aircon, vents, light fittings would all be guess work....

I could not disagree more. Design is the simple part. It is done in the head and on the back of smoke boxes by thousands of sparks everyday. A nicely presented drawing on A1 paper and a design done on a software program is no more than a fancy computer and an expensive printer. The guys on the ground are the real stars IMO.

 

[netblindpaul]

So how do they share smoke packets when there are thousands of metres of cable and pipe to be installed?

 

[tazz]

I could not disagree more. Design is the simple part. It is done in the head and on the back of smoke boxes by thousands of sparks everyday. A nicely presented drawing on A1 paper and a design done on a software program is no more than a fancy computer and an expensive printer. The guys on the ground are the real stars IMO.

You carry on house bashing, best job you can do...

 

[Guest666]

You carry on house bashing, best job you can do...

Have not touched a house in 10 years. We use consultants for our design work. Sub it out is far cheaper than wasting a decent electrician's time sitting in front of a pc.

 

[Octopus]

Not true, the requirement for "non-combustible" CU casings came directly from LFB.

It may have come from the LFB, but it wouldn't have got any traction if the IET and the schemes hadn't encouraged it.

I'm 99% certain that the IET are clutching at straws to come up with more and more regs to justify the AMD's

 

[Guest666]

Me personally. I think the CU reg is justified.

 

[gutterball]

To get this back on topic. I agree that some protection is better than none, and I don't expect them to fit mains smokes . But I would expect them to advise that the battery ones are a minimum level of protection and explain the choices available.

 

[Octopus]

Me personally. I think the CU reg is justified.

Utter clap trap. Are you a FB employee?

 

[Engineer54]

Me personally. I think the CU reg is justified.

Perhaps you can substantiate that statement??

The IET seem to be having some trouble in that area, let's see if you can do better...

 

[tazz]

Shotgunsteve...or AKA UKESrail, .....BYE BYE Again...!!!

 

[Engineer54]

Shotgunsteve...or AKA UKESrail, .....BYE BYE Again...!!!

That explains some things!! lol!!

 

[edexlab]

Small point ....
Most ten year domestic type Smoke alarms ie Aico are presumably called this due to the rechargeable battery lifespan,
yet the actual detection elements are only guaranteed for 5 years after which the element is meant to be tested as per manufacturers guidance,
Yet its a common conception that you can fit and forget for 10 years
People need to check the instructions!

 

[Paul.M]

That explains some things!! lol!!

He stuck out like a saw thumb, my ban stick came out again. Bye bye hopefully for the last time?

 

[tazz]

Small point ....
Most ten year domestic type Smoke alarms ie Aico are presumably called this due to the rechargeable battery lifespan,
yet the actual detection elements are only guaranteed for 5 years after which the element is meant to be tested as per manufacturers guidance,
Yet its a common conception that you can fit and forget for 10 years
People need to check the instructions!

This is the recommended life span of any serviced optical/ion detector, weather aico or professional Apollo/Hochiki. Problem is part 6 domestic, if not serviced/tested correctly, I find pushing a test button a bit hit & miss, and would suggest a correct smoke test be conducted atleast once a year. I would also suggest the battery life, is a calculation only, with alarm activations, reducing the capacity.