Guest Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Your application is being delt with Zak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Posted June 17, 2005 Share Posted June 17, 2005 Thanks Zak Tankel - Managing Director - Security First (UK) - www.securityfirst.uk.com Disclaimer: Any comments or opinions expressed by me are my own as a member of the public and not of my employer or Company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 Dont thank me yet - the descision isnt just mine LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSS Posted June 19, 2005 Share Posted June 19, 2005 Should not be too much of a problem. 57357[/snapback] RAF Cardington... Shed Internal Dimensions: Length: 812 ft 247m Width: 180 ft 55m Height: 157 ft 47.85m = 652,080 cubic metres! ( or to better put it in context 23,128,205 cubic feet) 23.1 million cubic feet... so how many units matt? and I checked, the building does have 3 phase for power... would stratification be an issue here? Alarmbloke TSS Communication is "A question asked, and an Opinion given." I offer mine to help you with yours. Statements I make are my personal views only at the time they are posted, if I offend you sorry, must be taken in context and do not neccesarily represent those of my employer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoke Screen Posted June 19, 2005 Share Posted June 19, 2005 The long and the short of it is actual internal size does not matter. If we used an oil based generator (as we did when filling the Blackwall tunnel) the persistency of smoke produced is extreme. These generators will produce smoke for any period of time with the only limiting factor being consumable, and the smoke will persist long enough for the whole place to be filled. Part of the requirement with the Blackwall Tunnel was to completely fill it. Consider the implications of this: the Tunnel is open at both ends, there are fans forcing ventilation through the tunnel and there is prevailing wind conditions as well. We could not wait for the wind to be in our favour we just had to get on and do it.....oil based smoke generators were the key. OK it took an hour to fill it completely, but it can be done. Concept Engineering will give you more information on our simulation generators and their applications. If we are looking at a security application in an area like this we have to consider what it is that is actually likeley to be stolen and then start on point protection. It is possible to completely fill this area using security smoke generators but if we were specifying a system it would have to be one where the cost is commensurate with the risk. That said, if we were doing it, and the requirement was to completely fill the area, the spec would likeley be in the region of 90-100 flagship generators. For obvious reasons these generators are not oil based as the requirement with security is to NOT damage the goods you are protecting. Installations of that magnitude are not unheard of. There is a site in leicestershire with over 100 generators installed in it. If we were talking about sheer persistency of smoke however and ability to smoke log an area, there is no generator in the world that will touch an oil based one. From this point, though I would suggest if you have any questions for me, please post them in the Security Smoke forums. This is Pauls thread and I am not sure he would want us discussing these topics here. Mods feel free to move. , M Matt Gilmartin, Sales Director T: +44(01205) 821111 | F: +44(01205) 820316 info@smoke-screen.co.uk | www.smoke-screen.co.uk Head office: 1-2 North End, Swineshead, Boston, Lincs PE20 3LR Registered in the UK no. 2728491 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.