Jump to content
Security Installer Community

Open Or Closed/managed Protocol


Gambo

Recommended Posts

depends both have benefits. One problem with open protocol is that some clients get anyone to work on a system, dont matter if its right etc as long as its cheap. Closed removes that. We use open as a rule but some high risk sites are closed.

James

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally i prefer closed protocol - notifier, ziton etc

i find that open protocol can often be commisioned by people who are not engineers, therefore much of the process is guessed at, leaving a raft of problems. also, when using open you can be shafted by both panel manufacture and the protocol manufacture both blaming the other for problems.

With a closed protocol, they will help to correct the problem as they have no-one else to blame!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

personally i prefer closed protocol - notifier, ziton etc

i find that open protocol can often be commisioned by people who are not engineers, therefore much of the process is guessed at, leaving a raft of problems. also, when using open you can be shafted by both panel manufacture and the protocol manufacture both blaming the other for problems.

With a closed protocol, they will help to correct the problem as they have no-one else to blame!

WHS

its all a myth anyway the only truly open protocol system is a conventional panel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey All, i have heard that with the new EN54 in 2010 closed protocoll systems are being made non compliant is this correct??

All comments in this post are my own views and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from a fire officer down here, have done net searches but cant find anything about it.

All comments in this post are my own views and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a mumble a while ago about banning closed protocol systems, or at least opening them up so as owners of

systems could at least order heads etc themselves, and also hold a copy of the software for their own panel. A global/local made some big waves, but to my knowledge, these actions will not be made legal or otherwise for a long time if at all.

Pity, as to me, some big companies are technically, in some instances, leaving a client with reduced or no cover, as the hum and haw about how the client needs to sign a new service agreement before they can deal with them, can go on for months before new parts can be sourced, if at all.

AWACS UK Website

email:

advanced warning and communicated systems

installation...intergration...innovation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a mumble a while ago about banning closed protocol systems, or at least opening them up so as owners of

systems could at least order heads etc themselves, and also hold a copy of the software for their own panel. A global/local made some big waves, but to my knowledge, these actions will not be made legal or otherwise for a long time if at all.

Pity, as to me, some big companies are technically, in some instances, leaving a client with reduced or no cover, as the hum and haw about how the client needs to sign a new service agreement before they can deal with them, can go on for months before new parts can be sourced, if at all.

I'm not a fan of closed protocol but owners of any system (open,closed or managed) shouldn't be working on them unless they're appropriately trained, if not then they're asking for trouble.

Managed protocols offer the best of both worlds, you are guaranteed that the engineer working on the system is suitably trained and has the support required to work on the system (usually!!) but are not tied into one company. The owners of the system have a choice of many companies capable of working on the system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of closed protocol but owners of any system (open,closed or managed) shouldn't be working on them unless they're appropriately trained, if not then they're asking for trouble.

Managed protocols offer the best of both worlds, you are guaranteed that the engineer working on the system is suitably trained and has the support required to work on the system (usually!!) but are not tied into one company. The owners of the system have a choice of many companies capable of working on the system

What's the difference between closed and managed protocols?

Fire Member

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the difference between closed and managed protocols?

managed protocol is a closed protocol system with agents i.e you don't have to use the manufacturer you can use one of their agents

and how does a managed protocol stop the untrained 'handyman' having a go?

its supposed to give the customer an option ok we as the manufacturer might have annoyed you but you can use one of our agents to fix your fault etc......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of managed, closed or open the client (Responsible Person) has a duty to ensure the people working on the system are competent to do the job.

This must start I would suggest, by using an established fire alarm company (not joe bloggs electrics and plumbing), perhaps one that is third party acredited, and perhaps the RP should ask specifically for a statement from the company that they consider themselves competent to work on the system.

Personally I don't care if joe bloggs buggers up a system. If someone dies I'd hope he gets found out and locked up. But 99.9% the panel goes into a continuous fault condition and the Company eventually gets the hump and employs a proper company to put things right.

Therefore decent companies do eventually get the jobs, its just a pity the cowboys tend to get away with the service fees for so long....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of managed, closed or open the client (Responsible Person) has a duty to ensure the people working on the system are competent to do the job.

This must start I would suggest, by using an established fire alarm company (not joe bloggs electrics and plumbing), perhaps one that is third party acredited, and perhaps the RP should ask specifically for a statement from the company that they consider themselves competent to work on the system.

Personally I don't care if joe bloggs buggers up a system. If someone dies I'd hope he gets found out and locked up. But 99.9% the panel goes into a continuous fault condition and the Company eventually gets the hump and employs a proper company to put things right.

Therefore decent companies do eventually get the jobs, its just a pity the cowboys tend to get away with the service fees for so long....

the responsible person is also responsible for the fire risk assesment, which should stipulate that any fire alarm works are carried out by a third party accredited company, unfortunately well in my eyes the bafe system has dummed this down as people can apply to be accredited for certain disciplines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think closed protocol is naff as it is a licence for those manufacturers (not mentioning any particular company) to rip off customers by charging high prices for spares and servicing. I am not knocking the product as all systems whether they are open or closed protocols have good points and bad points.

Peter Robinson

Freelance

M:07889038650

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the responsible person is also responsible for the fire risk assesment, which should stipulate that any fire alarm works are carried out by a third party accredited company, unfortunately well in my eyes the bafe system has dummed this down as people can apply to be accredited for certain disciplines.

Thats true.... but then the company is only accredited for the module they have... eg Installation or Design.... because its not made clear on the paperwork the customer just sees a BAFE logo and makes an assumption.

Although you can only get Certificates of Conformity if you have the Commissioning module, anyone who gets the Installation module can fob the client off that they can commission or maintain.

We blew a major controls company out the water a while ago as they commissioned a major system in a recycling/ incinerator plant but when we checked the NSI website they were only alllowed to maintain, not design or commission. And they won the job on the strength of being third party accredited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
and how does a managed protocol stop the untrained 'handyman' having a go?

It doesn't and I doubt whether anything will ever stop that. It does however stop the 'Mr yesterday I was an electrician today I am a fire alarm engineer' working on the system, and therefore offers peace of mind for the client as he knows the engineer working on the system is suitably qualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get you mate i really do, but in all honesty.

If using a pro company with the correct ideals who wouldnt work on a system they had no access to (ie us) id agree. But a spark who thinks he knows fire.... whats the difference between them and the handyman. It can still be worked on, just they are more likly to disable things or bodge thing

securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse

Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we've established that nothings gonna stop the handyman having a go at anything, be it fire, intruder or....servicing the MD's car.

I'm looking at it from a clients perspective, at the end of the day he has a duty to ensure that his fire system is maintained by a suitably trained engineer, if he chooses to have it done by the handyman or local spark who claims to know what he's doing he's leaving himself at risk of the system failing or not functioning correctly. Managed protocol eliminates this risk as only trained engineers have the correct tools and support to work on the system.

I'm sure the MD wouldn't choose to have his Merc serviced at the local Fiat dealers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.