System Sensor’s BEAM200(S) is an intelligent, single-ended, loop-powered, reflected-type beam smoke detector. Each detector can protect an area up to 328 feet and operates in conditions with temperature extremes ranging from minus 22 to 131 degrees Fahrenheit. Designed for large, open areas with high-ceilings and temperature extremes, the BEAM200(S) is ideal for churches, atriums, warehouses, garages and other places where standard smoke detectors may be difficult to install and maintain.

Product Features

If smoke enters and obscures the infrared beam between the detector’s transmitter/receiver unit and reflector, the detector generates an alarm signal. However, because the detector is sensitive to the environment, if dirt and dust start collecting on the detector’s lens, the detector generates a trouble signal, indicating the need for service.

Designed to simplify installation and maintenance, the BEAM200(S) detector features six sensitivity levels, including two Acclimate™ settings. When either Acclimate setting is selected, the detector automatically adjusts its sensitivity to the environment using advanced software algorithms, leading to a reduced number of false alarms. Additionally, the device is addressable, which means that the location of the alarm will be indicated at the fire alarm panel.

The most revolutionary feature of the BEAM200(S) is the integral sensitivity test feature. The product is capable of meeting the maintenance and testing requirements for NFPA 72 by blocking the beam’s path with a calibrated test filter, internal to the unit. The beam, upon command by either a remote test station (RTS451/RTS451KEY) or the fire alarm control panel, will, using a servo-motor, insert a test filter into the path of the beam and indicate whether it passes its internal test criteria. This patented feature cements the reputation of the beam detector as a market leader.

Other features of the intelligent beam detector include an optical sight and a 2-digit signal strength meter for easy alignment.

Product Installation

The BEAM200(S) is easier to install than dual-ended projected beam detectors. Spacing guidelines for the BEAM200(S) are 30 to 60 feet between projected beams and not more than one-half that spacing between a projected beam and a side wall. The detector is mounted with the transmitter/receiver and the reflector on opposite walls or hanging from the ceiling or any combination of the two.

When mounting the detector, the reflector must be mounted within 10 degrees horizontally and vertically to the transmitter/receiver unit. The maximum tolerance for non-perpendicular mounting locations for the reflector is 10 degrees.

Beam Online Training

Online product training and testing modules on System Sensor’s conventional beam detector series are now offered at www.systemsensor.com/training/beam.

The comprehensive, specification-focused primers on System Sensor products require users to sign in by providing basic contact information. Once registered, users can navigate through several screens that highlight “sales features” of the beam detectors and then complete a multiple-choice test to gauge retention. The test results are then archived under the registrant’s sign-in for future reference.

Photoelectric detection is preferred for several reasons, including:

1. Detection Capability — Photoelectric detection responds better to the larger smoke particles found in ductwork during a fire.
2. NFPA Recommends Photoelectric — The National Fire Alarm Code Standard 72, section A.5.14.4.2 explicitly states, “In almost every fire scenario in an air-handling system, the point of detection will be some distance from the fire source, therefore, the smoke will be cooler and more visible because of the growth of sub-micron particles into larger particles due to agglomeration and recombination. For these reasons, photoelectric detection technology has advantages over ionization detection technology in air duct system applications.”
3. Environmental Immunity — High humidity and condensation can cause false alarms with ionization detectors. Photoelectric detectors operate more efficiently, generating fewer false alarms.
4. Industry Preferred — Photoelectric detection is preferred by the fire alarm industry, manufacturers of commercial packaged air conditioning units and major retailers.
5. Low-Flow — Photoelectric detectors are capable of operating in air speeds as low as 100 feet-per-minute to meet new HVAC applications and codes with variable air volume systems and fire smoke dampers.

Can I interconnect more than 10 Innovair (4-wire, conventional) duct smoke detectors?

Absolutely. Refer to, Interconnecting more than 10 Innovair 4-Wire Conventional Duct Smoke Detectors, on System Sensor’s website (www.systemsensor.com) under Technical Field Bulletins for the simple, two-step connection method.

What is the best procedure for testing System Sensor duct-mounted smoke detectors?

There are four simple steps to test System Sensor’s duct-mounted smoke detectors:

1. Verify the detector is installed per NFPA 72 guidelines and is in accordance with the manufacturer’s installation instructions.
2. Employ the detector’s built-in test feature, such as the test magnet or accessory test switch. These features are designed to meet NFPA and Underwriters Laboratories functional test requirements that ensure the detectors are operable and will respond to minimum smoke requirements.
3. Measure the pressure differential across the sampling tubes (exhaust and intake) with a manometer to ensure the detector will respond to smoke in the duct airflow. This is the manufacturer’s acceptable test.
4. Apply smoke directly to the detector head to initiate an alarm. The sampling tubes may need to be blocked off for this test and then reopened afterwards.

Why is a smoke bomb test not recommended for ionization duct smoke detectors?

Based on evidence with in-house and field-testing of ionization, duct-mounted smoke detectors, there are three notable reasons:

1. Ionization smoke detectors are most sensitive to smoke particles ranging from .01 to .3 microns. Particles produced by smoke bombs tend to become larger the farther they travel from the source, triggering a slow response.
2. Smoke bombs produce cold smoke particles, which are larger and not as easily detected by ionization smoke detectors. These particles are also dependent on relative humidity, distance traveled from the source and time of activation. This phenomenon is caused because the smoke is more of a mist than suspended solids in warm gases. In other words, the smoke doesn’t represent a true smoke composition or fire signature for smoke detector activation.
3. It is possible to pass a smoke bomb test, but to be out of the required manometer range for sampling, giving the installer a false sense of proper operation.

Although unadvisable, if you choose to conduct a smoke bomb test, use a photoelectric smoke detector, which typically responds to smoke particles between .3 and 10 microns, and, if you have a respiratory ailment, use a self-contained breathing apparatus.

Where can a System Sensor duct-mounted smoke detector be installed in relation to the duct?

System Sensor duct-mounted detectors can be installed horizontally and vertically to — and on top of, within and underneath — the duct. However, we do not recommend installing underneath the duct because condensation may drain into the electronic circuitry and cause electrical damage.

To determine the best location, System Sensor recommends comparing the pressure differential between the sampling and exhaust tube. The pressure differential must be within specified limits of .0015 to 1.20 inches/water for photoelectric smoke detectors. The detector housing cover must be securely fastened to complete the airtight enclosure for proper air sampling and to restrict contaminants from entering the detector head.

In order to shut down the HVAC system, what do I connect my HVAC or RTU (Roof Top Unit) to?

To provide immediate shutdown during an alarm, connect to the controller voltage from the RTU. Connecting to the thermostat will only allow a gradual shutdown of the HVAC system. In some cases, the RTU manufacturer requires a shutdown of this type because, if stopped too fast, the bearings could become damaged. Be sure to review each situation accurately.

Can System Sensor test stations and other accessories be used with duct smoke detectors manufactured by other companies?

No. They are not compatible due to a different electrical makeup. This includes the SSK451 Multi-Signaling Device, which features:

1. An audible and visible alarm annunciation.
2. A key activated test and reset functions.
3. Green, amber and red LEDs that provide visual indication of power, trouble and alarm indications.
4. An optional snap-on smoke strobe.

California

The enforcement process for school life-safety projects differs from the process required for private sector projects. Schools must still adhere to California Building Code Requirements; the difference is that several agencies, primarily the local school board, enforce code. The local fire department, for example, enforces fire flows, fire lanes and building fire-safety inspections. The Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, reviews projects, in cooperation with the State Fire Marshal, for structural, ADA and general fire-and life-safety requirements of the codes.
(Source: www.cde.ca.gov)

Minnesota

The Minnesota State Fire Code does not require that all fire-alarm systems be monitored by a central station or that automatic fire department response be initiated. Buildings or situations that require monitoring and automatic fire department response include automatic sprinkler systems exceeding 100 sprinklers (20 sprinklers in new buildings) and certain schools that use an automatic fire-alarm system in lieu of fire-rated egress corridors. In addition, school districts are required to submit a fire-protection plan for any addition to, or major renovation of, an existing building, including the installation of buildings to be relocated. As a minimum, the fire-protection plan must cover the following issues:

• Maintenance of exits from occupied portions of the existing building;

• Fire department access to both existing and new buildings;

• Maintenance of existing fire-protection systems (fire alarm, standpipes, etc.);

• Fire department water supply;

• Whether any fire separations will be provided between the new construction/remodeling and the existing building.
(Source: www.dps.state.mn.us)

New York

All buildings that are owned, operated or leased by private schools, public school districts or Boards of Cooperative Educational Services must be inspected annually for compliance with applicable sections of 8NYCRR155 Regulations of the Commissioner of Education and for compliance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. A Public School Fire Safety Report must be completed as part of this process. This includes inspections of fire sprinklers and connected fire alarms, fire-hydrant systems, fire drills and evacuation procedures. A fire- and life-safety history of the school must be provided by a school official to determine whether fire drills were held in accordance with section 807 of the Education Law and F405 of the Fire Code of New York State, as well as state the average evacuation time. The history also details whether employee fire prevention, evacuation and fire safety training was provided, and records were maintained in accordance with Section F406 of the New York State Fire Code. Section 808 of the Education Law requires every school in the state to provide a minimum of 45 minutes of instruction in arson and fire prevention for each month school is in session.
(Source: www.emsc.nysed.gov)

Note: For complete information, consult specific fire codes and board of education guidelines for each state.

Q. What are the current life-safety requirements for educational facilities in Illinois?

A. It is mandated in Illinois that every 10 years schools are required to have life-safety surveys performed on their buildings. It often takes several years to get all the various school districts through the 10-year cycle. I’m sure there are a wide variety of programs designed to achieve the same goals in different states (see “Fire- and Life-Safety Requirements for K-12 Schools by State”).

Q. Is there a standard life-safety survey that you must follow?

A. Yes, Illinois has a standard protocol developed by the state board of education that we follow and submit (downloadable at www.isbe.state.il.us/construction/health_safety). Sometimes the district will ask us to go above and beyond what we’re doing in the life-safety survey. In other words, while we’re in looking for life-safety issues in the school building, we would also look for other issues that would not be funded by life-safety money, but require some attention and maintenance — for example, tuck-pointing on a building. Some districts want us to look at everything that they might be facing with their building in terms of future capital maintenance problems because there are a lot of other things that need attention in a building every year.

Q. How long do life-safety surveys usually take?

A. There is some field work involved because the architect is required to prepare a base plan for the school, which shows the location of all the exits and fire-safety devices. We have to research all that, and then we generally put the information in an AutoCAD (computer-aided design) electronic file. That’s the way most districts want it. If the district already has good drawings in hand, then it’s not that big of a time issue. Otherwise, it can create a lot of work measuring up the school and making a drawing of it.

It usually takes about 30 days to do the actual survey. Then it has to be presented to the owner for review and to the board of education for final approval. The whole process generally takes 90 days.

Q. At what point in the process do you make recommendations to the school?

A. After the board of education accepts the survey report, the next step is for the architect to specifically state what the recommended projects are. These recommendations are then submitted to the state to obtain approval for use of life-safety funds to proceed with the projects.

Q. How does a school typically address any life-safety problems discovered by your survey?

A. When items are discovered that need to be addressed, they are what we call amendments to the life-safety survey. In other words, the survey itself describes the condition of the school building. Then the architect writes amendments to identify items that need to be corrected. The life-safety survey is like a benchmark for the health of the facility — similar to your annual physical. It is part of a continuous process that includes interaction between the architect and the school district every year in between the years we survey.

Q. How are amendments prioritized for each school building?

A. An amendment is listed on the survey as either an A-, B- or C-level item. An A-level item requires immediate attention; B is a must-do item, but one that could be done within three years; and C is an item that is discretionary, funded by life-safety dollars, but not a threat to health or safety. An example of a C-level item is a roof-replacement project. A roof replacement might have other implications, however, because, what does a leaky roof mean in a school building? It means mold. And then that’s a health problem. So the roof project might move up in priority to a B-level item.

Q. Once life-safety funding is approved for a project, what is the next step?

A. At that point, we create the drawings, put the project out for bid and the lowest qualified bidder proceeds with the work. After the work is completed, we do the inspection and sign off on it. We don’t actually get involved in the project work; we’re involved in securing the contracting groups to do that work.

Q. What is the general condition of smoke detection and alarm systems in the schools you have surveyed within the past few years?

A. The facilities of our clients have been in compliance with rare minor exceptions. Most school districts recognize the importance of these systems and have made a good effort over the past five years to update these systems to current technology. We have seen a marked increase in the number of total system replacements in the past three years. Smoke detection and fire-alarm systems are annually tested and certified. Many are older systems that still function well. Coverage and location of the devices is prescribed per Health/Life Safety Code for Public Schools.

Q. What types of fire-safety issues have you encountered that are unique to school life-safety projects?

A. School facilities are generally similar and abide by the same requirements. One issue we have seen is the question of how many detectors are required in a library. This seems to be the topic of some debate among local code officials and engineers.

In a related issue, Illinois state legislation recently has required sprinkler systems to be installed in all new school buildings and major additions. For a long time, school buildings were not required to have sprinklers. That’s a major step forward and that happened within the past five years.

Q. How does your work with schools differ from that of an architect in the private sector?

A. As a school architect, you really have to be a specialist in school life-safety issues in order to keep up with the changes, understand the processes and advise the owners. It is distinctly different from what the private sector architect would be involved with. It truly is a specialty.

“Parents look for a good fire-alarm system and a good security system, and those things are important to them. If you have any common sense at all, you want that protection for your children,” says  Maxwell, who owns the Children’s Haven Child Care Center in Denver with her husband.

That’s why when Maxwell and her directors give tours at the center, they point out the new ExitPoint™ directional sound system that helps safeguard their young charges.

“It was a very smart move to do sounders versus horns and strobes,” says Efrain Cordova, an electrical contractor with Competitive Electric Inc. in Littleton, Colo. Efrain installed ExitPoint at the center, as well as a fire-alarm package that includes standard audible/visible devices.

Test Runs Prove System Effectiveness

Children’s Haven sets off ExitPoint during its monthly fire drills so that the children become accustomed to the sound and practice reacting to it. During their first ExitPoint drill, the center’s full building evacuation time dropped from about two minutes to one.

Although infants and toddlers are too young to evacuate the same way the older children do — and by law, their rooms must have their own outside exits — ExitPoint sounders are located above their exits to provide extra assistance for adult caregivers. “Even if the room filled with smoke and was in pitch-black darkness, they’d still get out,” says Cordova.

Sounders, in Cordova’s opinion, are “10-fold better than horns for a standard fire-alarm system” in helping people evacuate quickly.

The threat of fatal campus fires has caught the attention of federal lawmakers. Proposed laws have been written to improve campus fire safety by offering matching federal funds for retrofitting automatic sprinklers in residence halls that do not have them. In addition, on March 30, the U.S. House of   Representatives passed H.R. 609, the College Access and Opportunity Act, which reauthorizes programs under the Higher Education Act. Included in the legislation is a provision called the Campus Fire Safety Right-to-Know Act.

The bill, in its current form before the Senate, amends the Higher Education Act to require colleges and universities to provide prospective and current students fire-safety information for the school. The proposed legislation would also authorize a report from the Secretary of Education to Congress on the extent of the nation’s campus fire-safety problem. Using the same procedures as schools to compile and disclose crime statistics and other safety information, H.R. 609 would make information readily available to parents and students who are researching schools.

System Sensor supports these commitments to improve campus safety and share information.

Mike Berg

Business Unit Leader
System Sensor

University installs ExitPoint™ and partners with local professionals to improve residential hall life safety.

Oregon State University (OSU) has made fire- and life-safety a real priority, and the partnerships and resources that university officials have dedicated to improving campus safety prove that this isn’t just big talk and no action.

The University Housing and Dining Services (UHDS) department has developed a partnership with the municipal fire department, which is the core of the UHDS Fire Prevention and Protection Program (FP&P). It is a rarity for a housing organization to allocate so much in terms of resources to an FP&P program. When the GEM building, the former College Inn, a residential hall on OSU’s Corvallis, Ore. campus, was scheduled for remodeling, OSU officials were given the opportunity to put the program to the test.

Gus Villaret, associate director for housing and dining at OSU, explains, “We put together a very good program in conjunction with the Corvallis Fire Department to train our full-time and student staff and, subsequently, the students who reside in on-campus residences. Every year, the staff and residents are trained to understand the fire-safety features of their particular building. Fire drills are conducted throughout the year, and all facilities are inspected periodically. Fire safety is something we take very seriously.”

That’s why Villaret thought it would be a good idea to install System Sensor’s ExitPoint™ directional sound technology in the GEM building.

ExitPoint incorporates sounders, positioned at perimeter exits and stairwells, to guide building occupants to the nearest exit quickly and efficiently in the event of a fire. Triggered by the fire-alarm control panel, ExitPoint uses broadband sound that evacuees intuitively follow to safety. Unlike standard fire-alarm sounders, which simply alert people that there is a fire in the building, directional sound technology directs occupants which way to go – the perfect solution for the GEM. OSU’s installation makes it the first university in the country to use ExitPoint in a residence hall.

Most of OSU’s residence halls are simply designed. For example, a student turns left or right out of their room, and then walks straight ahead to the stairwell at the end of the corridor. Therefore, it’s easy for a person to find their way out of the building. The GEM building, however, is more complicated.

The GEM is a seven-story, 120,900-square-foot concrete building that was recently converted from a residential hall cell building to studio-style suites, plus one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments. The food service area was also converted into loft units. Altogether, 231 units were created. Each floor now consists of three wings and a central lobby with elevators. The wings are winding, so going around one corner does not necessarily bring you to a stairwell or exit.

There are many considerations made prior to laying out and designing a campus fire- and life-safety system, especially in a remodeling job. As Kurt Haapala, an associate with Mahlum Architects and designer of the GEM building, explains, “From the architect’s perspective, normally we try to meet the letter of the code when thinking about fire- and life-safety, as well as safety egress. But when we walked through this building, we were all left with a certain level of uneasiness about the egress route. It was simply a very confusing building. It was even very confusing to find the mezzanine level and to know how to get in or out during an emergency. ”