buradan - Yangın

TÜYAK BİLDİRİLER KİTABI
2009 PROCEEDINGS BOOK
2
InTEgRATIon – JusT AnoThER Buzz WoRD oR An InTELLIgEnT
soLuTIon To FIRE sAFETY?
John Paul BATEson
Honeywell
Abstract
Life safety systems have typically been interfaced into other
building systems by means of simple relays and inputs. This
session will address whether integrating intelligently through the
use of software really can increase the level of cover afforded for
life and property, whilst at the same time, afford increased levels of
security and protection from terrorist attack.
The vast majority of buildings and sites have a number of systems
that operate independently of each other: fire alarm detection,
intrusion, closed circuit television (CCTV), access control, heating,
lighting, ventilation and air conditioning. All of these functions
could be deemed to be the core sensing and control components
of today’s buildings. Whilst effective in their own right, the ability to
integrate these systems raises the question of whether they are as
effective as they could be and indeed should be. This session will
also address this question.
Entegrasyon – Bir Diğer Moda Terim mi Yoksa
Yangın Güvenliği Konusunda Akıllı Bir Çözüm
mü?
Özet
Can güvenliği (yangın, gaz algılama ve uyarı vb) sistemleri,
genellikle binalardaki diğer sistemlerle, röle ve izleme modülleri
kullanılarak entegre edilmektedirler. Bu bildiri, yazılım bazında
gerçekleştirilen akıllı entegrasyon uygulamalarının, can ve mal
güvenliğinin korunma seviyesini arttırırken aynı zamanda düzeyi
arttırılmış bir güvenlik sistemine ve terörist saldırılara karşı
daha korunaklı bir yapıya olanak verip veremeyecekleri üzerinde
durulacaktır.
Bina ve tesislerin büyük çoğunluğunda, birbirlerinden bağımsız
olarak çalışan bir çok sistem mevcuttur: Yangın algılama ve ihbar,
hırsız alarm, kapalı devre televizyon (CCTV), kartlı geçiş, ısıtma,
aydınlatma, havalandırma ve iklimlendirme sistemleri gibi. Tüm bu
işlevler, günümüz binalarının temel algılama ve kontrol bileşenleri
olarak varsayılabilir. Her ne kadar kendi başlarına belli bir
verimliliğe sahip olsalar da, bu sistemleri birbirleri arasında entegre
edebilme olanağı, ne kadar etkin oldukları ve aslında ne kadar
etkin olabilecekleri konusunda bir soruyu gündeme getirmektedir.
Bu bildiride aynı zamanda bu sorunun da yanıtı aranacaktır.
1. Summary
Integration can be as straight forward as linking multiple systems
together with something as simple as a relay, but this begs the
TÜYAK 2009
question of whether this does the term
‘integration’ any justice. In addition,
what protection of life and property
does this method of connectivity bring
in comparison to that of a truly intelligent
approach to building integration? This is
considered below with regards to a fire
scenario, using a partially integrated
approach and a smart alternative.
1.1. Fire scenario: A partially integrated approach
When a fire system activates, alarms sound, certain doors close to
help contain the possible fire and others open to allow occupants
out of the building. There may be a link to a Building Management
System (BMS) that shuts down air conditioning and intake into the
building. It all seems straightforward enough on the surface and is
quite typical of a great many installations in use today. However,
it is important to look at what is actually happening beneath the
surface.
The fire alarm control panel will, if it is capable, identify the point
source of the activation. If the system is monitored, the Fire Brigade
will be called. In most cases, the occupants will be required to file
out of the building in accordance with the evacuation plan.
With regards to how the building/facility managers know whether a
genuine fire has caused the activation or a false alarm, the answer
is that they don’t. Unless someone is tasked with investigating the
activation, there is no way of telling. This means that the Brigade
will be called out to attend yet another unwanted activation. Some
might argue it is better that they attend than not at all. However, it
would be preferred if they only came when actually needed. The
human nose may be a good ‘detector’, but do we really need to
burn the nose to spite the system?
Assuming the fire alarm system has operated as intended and
the occupants are now evacuating the building through the doors
that have now failed safe, allowing them to escape, the very same
doors that are letting people out are also letting people in. With
regards to how do the building/facility managers know that the
system hasn’t been maliciously activated to provide thieves with an
opportunity to take the laptops that have been left behind, again,
the answer is they don’t. The person who is checking to see if the
fire is genuine can’t be replied upon to stop them. This scenario
raises the question of whether building/facility managers can be
selective about how the security systems operate in the event of
a fire condition.