B A F S A F O C U S M AY 2 0 2 2
Introducing the revolutionary Hydrov Tank Cleaning Robot.
Not always the solution I’VE NEVER FOUND A COPY OF FOCUS IN A D E N T I ST ’ S WA I T I N G R O O M , S O I F YO U A R E R E A D I N G T H I S M A G A Z I N E , Y O U A L R E A D Y P R O B A B LY K N O W
Suitable for all types of cylindrical fire water tanks.
Eliminates the need to drain down water storage tanks for cleaning purposes.
The perfect cleaning application to be used as part of Planned Preventive Maintenance on newly installed & ageing tanks.
sales@hydrov.co.uk
100% noninvasive, allows the onsite sprinkler system to remain live at all times.
Eliminates the need for confined space entries into tanks and the associated risks.
03333 660267
Compliant Residential Monitoring FloWatch 9251
Take full control of your fire sprinkler monitoring requirements with FloWatch 9251. The only specifically designed fully compliant residential and domestic fire sprinkler monitoring system available. FloWatch 9251 gives you complete confidence that your sprinkler system is in full working order and ready to operate should it ever be required.
24 Hour Battery Backup
Monitor System Components
The specified AGM rechargeable battery provides the system with a 24hr battery backup in the event of a mains power failure.
As well as monitoring flow switches, FloWatch 9251 can monitor all the required fault conditions detailed in BS9251:2021 table 5.
Audible Alarm
Pump Fault Monitoring
A distinguishable audible alarm in the event of a sprinkler activation or fault on the system.
FloWatch has dedicated inputs for pump fault monitoring, giving early detection if a fault should occur.
Tank Level Alarms
Remote Browser Viewing
Monitors low levels of water within a sprinkler or combined tank to raise an alarm indicating in a failure of the water supply.
View the system status remotely via web browser, tablet or mobile device and receive email and text alerts in the event of an alarm.
www.flowatch.co.uk
01733830440
info@flowatch.co.uk
T H AT AUTO M AT I C WAT E R S U PPR E S S I O N SYST E M S ARE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT WRITES RITCHIE O’ CO N N E L L B A FS A A DVI S E R I N WA L E S .
over many years BAFSA and other organisations have tried to promulgate the wider use of sprinkler systems in particular. This has led in some quarters to accusations that we (the sprinkler industry/ sprinkler lobby/ church of the automatic water suppression system) believe “sprinklers to be a panacea... ” this is definitely not the case, to the best of my knowledge no-one has ever actually claimed this, it’s a good soundbite though, so it is often repeated! In reality we in the sprinkler industry and the wider fire safety industry are conscious that both active and passive fire protection measures are necessary to form part of a whole fire safety package. Although I will admit to a personal belief that most fire safety solutions would benefit from the inclusion of a well-designed, installed, commissioned and maintained sprinkler system. The evidence supports that belief. However the burgeoning acceptance of sprinklers as part of a fire safety solution at a time when fire engineering or performance-based solutions for smaller projects - even into the domestic market are becoming more widespread. Recently, I have come across a number of scenarios where the provision of an automatic water suppression system as part of a ‘fire engineered solution’ have amounted to nothing more than an ill-conceived notion which made no impact on a potentially dangerous situation. In each of these instances, which were all sleeping risks, had I still been a serving fire and rescue service officer the situations were sufficiently grave to have warranted a prohibition notice, I would also have recommended action against the person who ‘designed’ the system and the person who installed it (there was no commissioning or they’d be in the frame too). On each occasion the scenario was the same a sleeping risk which constituted a high risk to life, and fell outside current guidance. Consistently there were one or more bedrooms for which the only escape route would be compromised by a fire before persons asleep in the bedrooms could make their escape, the situations varied slightly with building height, open plan vs inner room scenarios, egress through higher risk rooms etc all being issues. The Responsible Person had, in good faith, taken the advice of an ‘expert(s)’ who identified the risk but assured them that the provision of a sprinkler system, or on one occasion a water mist system, would constitute a fire engineered solution and would remedy the problem. Ironically, on each occasion a properly designed system would in all likelihood have at least provided the basis for a robust solution
