search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Current affairs


Management is ‘really important’, taking into consideration FSO assessments, good housekeeping and self inspection in a corrective loop, as well as training and avoidance of unattended cooking. Other elements include ensuring proper oil


changes or replacement, full length duct cleans, provision of planned preventative maintenance and filter cleaning frequency. He echoed Mr Carraher’s call for companies to ‘notify where they can’t clean’, moving on to risk treatment in line with previously discussed guidance and legislation. Mr Tilley noted that risk management control


is ‘essential’, as is automatic suppression to a ‘recognised standard by an approved contractor’. Duct cleaning should be based on a risk assessment and adhere to recognised best practice, with insurers continuing to support and participate in development of standards.


Suppression systems


Nobel’s Ian Bartle noted Ansul was the ‘grandad’ of suppression technology, with wet chemicals the ‘vast majority’, though there is a ‘smattering’ of watermist. Wet chemicals use liquid ‘more efficiently’ and are manufactured ‘specifically’ for fryers, offering ‘fast fire knock down’ through chemical interaction. They can also be applied as mist to absorb heat,


and reduce oil to below flashpoint by creating a top layer. Delivered through sprinklers, they are designed to control and not extinguish, stopping growth and spread. As such, they are ‘acceptable to insurers’. With risks changing daily, there is usually a ‘lag


between a fire starting and suppression actuating’, though this gives people time to react. The aim of suppression is to ‘remove fuel and shut off the supply’, and watermist is efficient but ‘less effective’, requiring more water, only reducing temperature and creating steam. The primary aim is to cool the fire and secondly reduce oxygen, so watermist must run longer and does not offer a permanent barrier to air or separation from fuel. There are mechanical and electrical systems, the


former needing a balance between temperature detection levels and fire loads, and to avert false alarms. Electrical systems contain no parts, offer fast linear detection, monitored circuits and advanced electronics, and also allow remote monitoring. The aim is to make systems more user friendly,


and with worries around actuation, electrical systems have safe codes for easy disabling. Such systems can also tell users if damaged, reducing the cost of recharge. Mr Bartle noted that in the US, suppression is


mandatory but there is ‘no legislation here’, with the majority of installations requested by insurers and clients. All systems are covered by LPS 1223, UL 300 and ISO 15371, though nobody ‘dictates a system should be installed to roof level’.


On methods of application, he noted companies can design appliance specific systems, as kitchens and appliances change, and nozzles are often ‘out of kilter’. Companies can ‘now use overlapping protection’: while expensive, it ensures full coverage. However, ‘all the right questions’ must be asked at the survey stage, while systems should be checked every six months.


New technology


Dr Samantha Mudie introduced her Ecofix bio agent cleaning system, developed while undertaking her PhD. She worked with restaurant chain Mitchell and Butler to ‘enable heat recovery from ductwork’, the biggest barrier being clean air, with a greater need for fat, oil and grease (FOG) control. Composition and volume can affect FOG treatment, as well as temperature, turbulence, food and oil types and volumes, exhaust velocity, and duct insulation. She noted: ‘much research concludes that typical solutions have dubious results’, with humidity and temperature often too great for most to work effectively. TR19 guidance mentions that total FOG removal


is ‘not feasible’, so a ‘novel approach was needed’. Dr Mudie pointed out that chemicals are often used to remove FOG in other industries, which led her to develop Ecofix. The technology utilises bacteria and detergent to clean ductwork – a biofluid is combined and then delivered through nozzles in ducts, with timing and delivery controlled remotely. It can work up to 40m ‘but can go higher’, and


is bespoke ‘depending on the site’. Microbes do not pose a risk, with the detergent the ‘same as Fairy Liquid’, and the formula can work from five to 50 degrees Celsius. Bacteria feed on FOG deposits, and moisture is created by the spray, microbes becoming dormant once FOG is reduced. Water and CO2 molecules are left alongside a non flammable biomass residue that exits with air flow to be ‘harmlessly absorbed by nature’. Microbes clean ‘continuously’, drawn through ductwork by ventilation to reach and clean inaccessible areas. Studies found average grease levels fell over 12


weeks, with an upward curve only once bacteria dies. The system can also be used to prevent flashpoint fires, which was shown in a ‘simple yet expensive’ test that reduced flammability, offering a ‘routine part of system service for peace of mind’. Ecofix was proven to work by ‘rigorous scientific


and industry study’, with grease levels ‘significantly reduced and controlled’. While low levels remain, they are within TR19 limits ‘consistently’, and remaining deposits have 85% lower fat content, meaning fire risk has been ‘significantly and consistently reduced’


William Roszczyk is editor of Fire & Risk Management. For more information, view page 5


www.frmjournal.com MARCH 2018 49


FOCUS


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60