Method for determining reliability in fire detector

Abstract

To provide a method for determining reliability in a fire detector of a disaster prevention system capable of suppressing a non-fire notification by determining reliability of the fire detector.SOLUTION: A disaster prevention system determines reliability of a fire detector 12 with the use of an occurrence frequency of a failure sign. The fire detector 12 performs: determining a failure sign of the fire detector 12 without determining a fire when the fire is not determined in fire judgement for judging the fire; and counting the occurrence frequency of the determined failure sign, or incrementing a cumulative value of the count of the occurrence frequency of the failure sign whenever the failure sign is determined. The fire detector 12 performs: determining an abnormality of the fire detector 12 that affects a light receiving value with the use of the light receiving value of a light receiving signal obtained from light received by a sensor part 64; determining an abnormality sign of the fire detector 12 when a value based on the light receiving value satisfies a failure-sign determination condition; regarding the determined abnormality sign as the failure sign; and counting the number of times determined as the abnormality sign as the occurrence frequency of the failure sign.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 4

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a method for determining the reliability of a fire detector in a disaster prevention system that monitors fires in tunnels using a fire detector connected to a signal line drawn from a disaster prevention receiving panel. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, fire detectors are installed in tunnels on expressways and other roads to monitor for fires in order to protect people and vehicles from fire accidents that may occur within the tunnel. These detectors are connected to signal lines drawn from a disaster prevention receiving panel to monitor for fires.

[0003] The fire detectors have detection areas on both the left and right sides, and are placed consecutively along the length of the tunnel, for example, at intervals of 25m or 50m, so that the detection areas of adjacent fire detectors overlap in a complementary manner.

[0004] In addition, the fire detector monitors radiation, such as infrared rays, from fire flames occurring inside the tunnel through a translucent window, and in order to maintain its flame monitoring function, sensitivity tests are conducted to check the sensitivity of the light-receiving element and dirt tests are conducted to monitor dirt on the translucent window.

[0005] However, with such conventional fire detectors, if they deteriorate over a long period of operation, even if they appear to be operating normally without any sensor failures detected in sensitivity tests or abnormal contamination detected in contamination tests, there is a possibility that the fire detector will output a fire detection signal and a false fire alarm will be issued from the disaster prevention receiving panel.In such cases, until it is confirmed that the alarm is not a fire alarm, a no-entry warning will be issued using an alarm display board or the like to prohibit vehicles from passing through the tunnel, and a person in charge will have to go to the site to check, which will take time and effort to reopen the tunnel and will have a significant impact, such as causing traffic congestion.

[0006] For this reason, a tunnel disaster prevention system has been proposed in which the disaster prevention receiving panel determines the degree of deterioration of the fire detector based on environmental stresses such as temperature, humidity, shock vibration, and electrical noise, and issues an alert.By being able to grasp the degree of deterioration of the fire detector, it is possible to take measures such as replacing the fire detector with a spare fire detector before a false fire alarm is issued.

[0007] In addition, in conventional tunnel disaster prevention systems, when the disaster prevention receiving panel receives a fire signal from a fire detector, the fire detector is temporarily restored after a specified time to prevent false fire alerts, and if a fire signal is received again within the specified time, it is determined to be a fire and a no-entry warning is issued using an alarm display board or other equipment. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0008] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2002-246962 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2016-128796 [Patent Document 3] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2018-169893 [Patent Document 4] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 6-290370 Summary of the Invention

[0009] However, with such conventional fire detectors, if a fire signal is sent due to an incorrect fire diagnosis caused by a malfunction or an unexpected non-fire factor, the fire signal may be sent again even after recovery if the malfunction or non-fire factor has not been resolved, and the problem of non-fire alarms still remains.

[0010] The present invention aims to provide a method for determining the reliability of a fire detector in a disaster prevention system, which can suppress false fire alarms by determining the reliability of a fire detector that has transmitted a fire signal. [Means for solving the problem]

[0011] (Method for determining the reliability of fire detectors: Counting the number of occurrences of signs of malfunction based on the results of fire detection1) The present invention provides a method for determining the reliability of a fire detector by using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: Fire detectors When a flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to flames contained in the received light (for example, infrared light in the 4.5 μm band specific to flames) satisfies a predetermined condition, the system does not determine that there is a fire in the fire judgment to determine whether there is a fire, and determines that there is a sign of a fire detector malfunction, When it is determined that a failure symptom has occurred, the number of occurrences of the failure symptom is counted.

[0012] (Method for determining the reliability of fire detectors: Counting the number of occurrences of signs of malfunction based on the results of fire detection2) Another aspect of the present invention is a method for determining reliability of a fire detector, which determines reliability of a fire detector using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: Fire detectors When a flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to a flame contained in the received light satisfies a predetermined condition, a fire judgment is performed to determine whether a fire exists. If a fire is not judged to be a fire, the system does not judge that a fire exists and judges that a sign of a fire detector malfunction has occurred. Each time it is determined that a failure symptom has occurred, the cumulative value of the count of the number of occurrences of the failure symptom is incremented.

[0013] (Method for determining the reliability of fire detectors: Counting the number of occurrences of signs of malfunction based on the results of fire detection3) Another aspect of the present invention is a method for determining reliability of a fire detector, which determines reliability of a fire detector using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: Fire detectors a fire is determined to be a fire when a flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to a flame contained in the received light satisfies a predetermined condition; If a fire is not detected based on the fire detection criteria, it is determined that a fire detector malfunction has occurred. When it is determined that the failure symptom has occurred, the number of occurrences of the failure symptom is counted.

[0014] In addition, in the invention of a method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, which is characterized by counting the occurrence of signs of failure based on the determination result of the fire determination condition, The fire determination has a plurality of fire determination conditions, If at least some of the plurality of fire determination conditions are not met, the fire is not determined to be a fire.

[0015] In addition, the fire judgment includes fire judgment using fire judgment conditions based on a non-flame light reception signal obtained from light in a wavelength band different from the characteristic wavelength band contained in the flame light reception signal and the received light (for example, infrared rays in the 2.3 or 5.0 μm band).

[0016] The fire determination also includes a fire determination using a fire determination condition based on the frequency of the flame light reception signal.

[0017] (Method for determining the reliability of fire detectors: Counting the number of occurrences of signs of malfunction based on the judgment of signs of abnormality in fire detectors) Another aspect of the present invention is a method for determining reliability of a fire detector, which determines reliability of a fire detector using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: Fire detectors The light reception value of the light reception signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit is used to determine abnormalities in the fire detector that affect the light reception value, If a predetermined value (e.g., a detection sensitivity coefficient or a light attenuation rate) calculated using the received light value satisfies a predetermined abnormality sign judgment condition that is stricter than the predetermined abnormality judgment condition for judging a fire detector abnormality (e.g., a sensitivity abnormality or a contamination abnormality), the fire detector is judged to have an abnormality sign (e.g., a sensitivity abnormality sign or a contamination abnormality sign) that affects the received light value, When it is determined that the fire detector has an abnormality sign, the abnormality sign of the fire detector is regarded as a failure sign of the fire detector, and the number of times that it is determined that the fire detector has an abnormality sign is counted as the number of occurrences of the failure sign.

[0018] (Sending an abnormality signal) When the fire detector determines that there is an abnormality in the fire detector, it transmits an abnormality signal (for example, a sensitivity abnormality signal or a contamination signal).

[0019] (Sending a failure prediction signal) Fire detectors When the number of occurrences of the failure sign satisfies a predetermined condition, it is determined to be a failure sign; If it is determined that there is a malfunction symptom, a malfunction symptom signal is transmitted.

[0020] (Sending failure prediction information) The fire detector transmits failure sign information including the number of occurrences of failure signs.

[0021] (Reliability assessment using disaster prevention receiving panel) The fire detector is connected to a disaster prevention receiving panel via a signal line. Receives malfunction warning information from fire detectors, The reliability of the fire detector is determined using the number of occurrences of the failure signs contained in the received failure sign information.

[0022] (Fire detector reliability assessment) The reliability of a fire detector is determined by the number of times that a malfunction symptom occurs.

[0023] (Resets the number of times the failure symptoms have occurred) When a predetermined period of time has elapsed since the fire detector counted the number of occurrences of a failure sign, the count of the number of occurrences of a failure sign is reset. [Effects of the Invention]

[0024] (Fire detector: Effect of counting the number of occurrences of signs of malfunction based on the results of fire detection) This invention of a fire detector features counting the number of times a malfunction symptom occurs based on the results of a fire detection determination, and can be used as a basis for determining reliability by determining the number of times a malfunction symptom occurs that did not lead to a judgment of a fire based on the results of a fire detection determination by the fire detector.Even if the fire detector determines a fire, if there are a large number of malfunction symptoms, it is likely that the fire is not a fire alarm, so it can be determined that the reliability has decreased, making it possible to reliably prevent fires that are not fire alarms from being handled.

[0025] (Fire detector: Effect of counting the number of occurrences of fire detector malfunction signs based on the judgment of fire detector malfunction signs) Also, the fire detector uses the light reception value of the light reception signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit to determine whether there is an abnormality in the fire detector that affects the light reception value, and when a predetermined value obtained using the light reception value satisfies a predetermined abnormality determination condition, it determines that there is an abnormality in the fire detector that affects the light reception value, and when the predetermined value obtained using the light reception value satisfies a predetermined abnormality sign determination condition that is stricter than the predetermined abnormality determination condition, it determines that there is an abnormal sign in the fire detector that affects the light reception value, and when it is determined that there is an abnormality sign in the fire detector, it regards the abnormal sign in the fire detector as a failure sign in the fire detector, and Since the number of times that the detector judges it to be an abnormal sign is counted as the number of times a failure sign has occurred, for example, if a predetermined value obtained using the light receiving value from a fire detector test satisfies a predetermined abnormal sign judgment condition that is stricter than the predetermined abnormality judgment condition, it is judged to be an abnormal sign and the number of times a failure sign has occurred is counted, which can be used as a basis for judging reliability.Even if the fire detector does not detect a failure in the light receiving element, if the number of times a failure sign has occurred is high, it is likely that it is not a fire alarm, so it can be judged to have decreased reliability and it can be made possible to reliably prevent fires from being handled due to non-fire alarms. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0026] [Figure 1] An explanatory diagram showing the overview of the tunnel disaster prevention system [Figure 2] An explanatory diagram showing the detection area of ​​a fire detector [Figure 3] An explanatory diagram showing the appearance of a fire detector [Figure 4] Block diagram showing the functional configuration of a fire detector [Figure 5] Flowchart showing the control operation of the fire detector [Figure 6] Block diagram showing the functional configuration of the disaster prevention receiving panel [Figure 7] A time chart showing the control action when the disaster prevention receiving panel determines that the fire detector is reliable. [Figure 8] A time chart showing the control action taken when the disaster prevention receiving panel determines that the reliability of the fire detector has decreased. [Figure 9] A time chart showing the control operation of the disaster prevention receiving panel when a malfunction sign is received from a fire detector. [Figure 10] An explanatory diagram showing the peak level of the received light signal and the number of occurrences of signs of failure when an internal test light source is activated during a fire detector sensitivity test. [Figure 11] Flowchart showing the sensitivity test of a fire detector with the judgment of the signs of failure DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0027] [Tunnel disaster prevention system] [Basic concept of the embodiment] Fig. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing an overview of a tunnel disaster prevention system, and Fig. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing the detection area of ​​a fire detector. The basic concept of the tunnel disaster prevention system according to this embodiment is that the fire detectors 12 in the tunnel connected to the signal lines 14a, 14b for each signal system from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 at least temporarily store failure sign information based on the number of occurrences of a predetermined failure sign, for example, failure sign information indicating the number of occurrences of the failure sign, and when the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it acquires the failure sign information from the fire detector 12 and evaluates and judges the reliability of the fire detector 12, and if it judges that the fire detector 12 is reliable, it performs a predetermined fire treatment when it receives a fire signal again after restoring the fire detector 12, and if it judges that the reliability has decreased, it sets a predetermined first fire judgment accumulation condition (for example, a first accumulation number threshold) of the fire detector 12 to the first fire judgment accumulation condition. The system restores the system by changing the fire detection accumulation condition to a second fire judgment accumulation condition (a second accumulation count threshold that is higher than the first accumulation count threshold) that is stricter than the first fire detection accumulation condition, and when a fire signal is received from at least one of the fire detectors 12 whose fire detection accumulation condition has been changed and the adjacent fire detectors that are overlappingly monitoring the detection area of ​​the fire detector 12, a predetermined fire handling procedure is carried out.Even if the fire detector 12 transmits a fire signal due to a malfunction of the light receiving element or an unexpected non-fire factor, the system evaluates the reliability from the malfunction prediction information of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal and determines whether it is reliable or has deteriorated.If it determines that it has deteriorated, it is considered to be a non-fire and does not carry out fire handling that involves a no-entry warning for the tunnel, etc., making it possible to more reliably prevent tunnel passage being stopped due to a non-fire alarm than before.

[0028] Furthermore, even if the reliability of the fire detector 12 is evaluated based on the failure prediction information and a decrease in reliability is determined, and the result is deemed to be a non-fire alarm, if it is an actual fire, the first fire judgment accumulation condition of the fire detector that sent the first fire signal can be changed to a stricter second fire judgment accumulation condition, making it less likely to issue a non-fire alarm.In addition, by receiving a fire signal from the fire detector whose fire judgment accumulation condition has been changed and at least one adjacent fire detector that overlaps with and monitors the detection area of ​​the fire detector, the fire can be determined to be a fire and fire treatment, including a no-entry warning for the tunnel, can be carried out, ensuring that the fire is detected and dealt with.

[0029] In addition, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 determines the reliability of the fire detector, thereby reducing the burden on the fire detector 12.

[0030] Furthermore, environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and electrical noise may be specific to each tunnel, signal system, or section. Taking this into consideration, the reliability of the fire detectors 12 for each tunnel, signal system, or section can be evaluated from the failure sign information indicating the number of occurrences of failure signs of the fire detectors 12 installed on a tunnel (tube), signal system, or section basis, and a determination can be made as to whether the detectors are reliable or have become unreliable.

[0031] In this embodiment, the failure sign refers to a phenomenon that predicts a failure that will occur in the future, and can also be called a sign of failure, a precursor to failure, or a sign of failure.

[0032] In the example of Figure 1, there is a one-to-one correspondence between signal systems and tunnels, but for example, multiple signal systems can be installed in one tunnel, or multiple tunnels can be treated as one signal system, and the relationship between signal systems and tunnels is arbitrary.

[0033] In the following explanation, the explanations in Figures 1 to 9 apply to the tunnel disaster prevention system of the first invention and the fire detectors of the third and fourth inventions, and the explanations in Figures 10 to 11 apply to the tunnel disaster prevention system of the second and seventh inventions and the fire detectors of the fifth and sixth inventions. Note that the third to sixth inventions do not preclude only one fire detector from being connected to one signal system.

[0034] [Outline of the tunnel disaster prevention system] As shown in Figure 1, an up-track tunnel 1a and an down-track tunnel 1b have been constructed as tunnels for expressways. Inside the up-track tunnel 1a and the down-track tunnel 1b, fire detectors 12 are installed along the walls in the longitudinal direction of the tunnels, for example, at intervals of 25 meters or 50 meters.

[0035] The fire detector 12 is equipped with two sets of fire detection parts, a right eye and a left eye, and as shown in Figure 2, has detection areas 15 in both the upward and downward directions along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel, and adjacent fire detectors 12 and their detection areas 15 are continuously arranged along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel so that, for example, the right eye 13R and the left eye 13L overlap in a mutually complementary manner, and monitors and detects fires by observing infrared rays from flames caused by a fire that has occurred within the detection area 15.

[0036] In addition, emergency facilities such as manual reporting devices and emergency telephones for reporting fires, fire hydrant systems for extinguishing fires and preventing the spread of fires, and water spray equipment that sprays fire-fighting water from water spray heads to protect the tunnel body and ducts from fires are installed in the up-track tunnel 1a and down-track tunnel 1b, but these are not shown in the illustration.

[0037] A power signal line and signal lines 14a, 14b are drawn from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to the up-line tunnel 1a and the down-line tunnel 1b, and multiple fire detectors 12 are connected to each of them, and each fire detector 12 is assigned a unique address. In the following explanation, the signal lines 14a, 14b may be referred to as signal line 14 when there is no need to distinguish between them.

[0038] In addition, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 is provided with a fire pump equipment 16, a duct cooling pump equipment 18, an IG substation equipment 20, ventilation equipment 22, an alarm display board equipment 24, a radio rebroadcasting equipment 26, a television monitoring equipment 28, and lighting equipment 30, and the fire detector 12 and the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 communicate via a signal line 14 using the so-called R-type transmission method.

[0039] Here, the IG slave station equipment 20 is a communication equipment that connects the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 and a remote monitoring and control equipment 32, which is a higher-level equipment provided externally, via a network.

[0040] The ventilation equipment 22 is a facility that generates ventilation airflow in the longitudinal direction of the tunnel by operating jet fans installed on the ceiling side inside the tunnel.

[0041] The warning display board equipment 24 is equipment that displays information such as no-entry warnings due to fires on electronic display boards to inform users. The radio rebroadcast equipment 26 is equipment that allows drivers and others inside the tunnel to receive information from the road administrator. The television monitoring equipment 28 is equipment that checks the scale and location of a fire, activates water spray equipment, and grasps the situation inside the tunnel when providing evacuation guidance. The lighting equipment 30 is equipment that drives and manages the lighting equipment inside the tunnel.

[0042] [Fire detector] (Appearance of a fire detector) FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing the appearance of the fire detector, and FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing an outline of the functional configuration of the fire detector.

[0043] 3, the fire detector 12 has two pairs of light-transmitting windows 50R, 50L, separated into left and right, in a sensor housing 46 provided in the upper part of the housing 44, and a sensor unit is built into each of the light-transmitting windows 50R, 50L. In addition, two pairs of light-transmitting windows 52R, 52L for test light sources, which house external test light sources used for soiling tests of the light-transmitting windows 50R, 50L, are provided near the light-transmitting windows 50R, 50L in positions where the sensor units can be seen through.

[0044] In the following description, the light-transmitting window 50R may be referred to as the right-eye light-transmitting window 50R, and the light-transmitting window 50L may be referred to as the left-eye light-transmitting window 50L.

[0045] (Outline of fire detector configuration) 4, the fire detector 12 is provided with a detector control unit 54, a transmission unit 56, a power supply unit 58, two sets of left and right fire detection units 60R, 60L, a test light emission drive unit 76, internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R and internal test light sources 78L, 80L, 82L used for sensitivity tests, and external test light sources 84R, 84L used for dirt tests. In the following description, the fire detection unit 60R may be referred to as the right-eye fire detection unit 60R, and the fire detection unit 60L may be referred to as the left-eye fire detection unit 60L.

[0046] The detector control unit 54 is a function realized by, for example, executing a program, and uses, as hardware, a computer circuit equipped with a CPU, memory, various input / output ports, and the like.

[0047] The transmission unit 56 is connected to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 shown in FIG. 1 by the transmission line S and transmission common line SC of the signal line 14, and various signals are transmitted and received by R-type transmission.

[0048] The power supply unit 58 receives power from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 shown in Figure 1 via the power line B and power common line BC included in the signal line 14, and a predetermined power supply voltage is supplied to, for example, the detector control unit 54, the transmission unit 56, the two sets of fire detection units 60R and 60L on the left and right, and the test light emission drive unit 76.

[0049] The test light emission drive unit 76 is connected to internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L used for sensitivity tests, and external test light sources 84R and 84L used for dirt tests, each of which is equipped with a krypton lamp as a light emitting element.

[0050] (Fire detection section) The fire detection units 60R, 60L each include a sensor unit 64, 68, 72 and an amplification processing unit 66, 70, 74. Taking the right fire detection unit 60R as an example, a right light-transmitting window 50R provided in the sensor housing unit 46 is disposed in front of the sensor units 64, 68, 72, and infrared energy from the external detection area is incident on the sensor units 64, 68, 72 through the right light-transmitting window 50R.

[0051] The right-eye fire detection unit 60R monitors fires, for example, by a three-wavelength flame detection method. The sensor unit 64 selectively transmits (passes) infrared rays in the 4.5 μm band, which is the CO2 resonance radiation band specific to flames, from the infrared energy incident through the right-eye translucent window 50R using an optical wavelength bandpass filter, receives the infrared rays using a light receiving sensor, converts them photoelectrically, and then performs predetermined processing such as amplification using an amplifier processing unit 66 to output a flame light receiving signal E1R corresponding to the amount of received light energy to the detector control unit 54.

[0052] The sensor unit 68 selectively transmits (passes) infrared energy in the first non-flame wavelength band, for example, the 5.0 μm band, from the infrared energy incident through the right eye translucent window 50R using an optical wavelength bandpass filter, receives the infrared energy using a light receiving sensor and performs photoelectric conversion, and then performs predetermined processing such as amplification using an amplification processing unit 70 and outputs the signal to the detector control unit 54 as a first non-flame light receiving signal E2R corresponding to the amount of received light energy.

[0053] The sensor unit 72 selectively transmits (passes) infrared energy of a second non-flame wavelength band, for example, 2.3 μm, from the infrared energy incident through the right eye translucent window 50R using an optical wavelength bandpass filter, receives the infrared energy using a light receiving sensor and performs photoelectric conversion, and then performs predetermined processing such as amplification using an amplification processing unit 74 and outputs the second non-flame light receiving signal E3R corresponding to the amount of received light energy to the detector control unit 54.

[0054] The amplification processing units 66, 70, 74 are provided with a preamplifier, a frequency filter that selectively passes a predetermined frequency band including the flame fluctuating frequency, a main amplifier, and the like.

[0055] (Fire judgment) The detector control unit 54 is provided with the function of a fire determination unit 86, which is a function realized by executing a program. The fire determination unit 86 determines a fire through a plurality of fire determination stages based on the flame light reception signal E1R, the first non-flame light reception signal E2R, and the second non-flame light reception signal E3R. The fire determination unit 86 performs fire determination through, for example, the following three stages:

[0056] When the flame light receiving signal E1R is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, the fire detection unit 86 calculates the relative ratio (E1R / E2R) to the first non-flame light receiving signal E2R, and when the relative ratio (E1R / E2R) exceeds the predetermined threshold, it determines that the first stage fire detection conditions have been met, determines that there is a fire (fire candidate), and performs the next second stage fire detection.

[0057] The second stage fire judgment by the fire judgment unit 86 calculates the relative ratio (E1R / E3R) of the flame reception signal E1R to the second non-flame reception signal E3R, and if the relative ratio (E1R / E3R) exceeds a predetermined threshold, it judges that a fire has occurred, as the second stage fire judgment conditions have been met.

[0058] Next, the fire judgment unit 86 performs the next third stage of fire judgment. The third stage fire judgment conditions by the fire judgment unit 86 are to perform a fast Fourier transform (FFT) on the flame light reception signal E1R, analyze the results, calculate the relative ratio between the relative intensity of the low frequency component of 4 Hz or less and the relative intensity of the high frequency component of more than 4 Hz and 8 Hz or less, for example, and if this relativization is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, it is judged that the third stage fire judgment conditions are met and a fire is present, and as a result, a fire has been judged in all of the first to third fire judgment stages, and the fire is judged as a whole to be a fire.

[0059] Furthermore, when the first to third stage fire determination conditions are met a predetermined number of times in succession, it is determined that a fire has occurred as a predetermined fire determination accumulation condition has been met, and a fire signal is transmitted to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10. The same is done in the left eye fire detection unit 60L.

[0060] The fire judgment by the fire judgment unit 86 based on the plurality of fire judgment stages is not limited to the above fire judgment, and one or more fire judgment stages may be added, or, for example, any of the above three stages may be omitted to make it two stages, or, for example, it may be four stages including the accumulation judgment stage.

[0061] (Determining signs of failure) The fire detection unit 86 determines that a malfunction symptom has occurred if a fire is not detected during the three fire detection stages described above and a fire is not determined to be a fire, and performs control to count the number of times the malfunction symptom has occurred N using a counter.

[0062] Furthermore, when the number of occurrences N of a failure sign satisfies a predetermined failure sign judgment accumulation condition, for example, when the number of occurrences N of a failure sign reaches a predetermined threshold Nth, the fire judgment unit 86 judges (confirms) it as a failure sign, transmits a failure sign signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and then performs predetermined failure sign processing. Note that the fire judgment unit 86 may further perform predetermined failure sign processing when the number of confirmed failure signs reaches a predetermined number.

[0063] The predetermined failure sign processing by the fire judgment unit 86 is, for example, processing to stop the transmission of the fire signal, processing to increase the threshold for the number of accumulated fire judgments to make the fire judgment accumulation conditions stricter, etc. The failure sign processing to stop the transmission of the fire signal is to stop the transmission of the fire signal and prevent the generation of a false fire alarm, because even if a fire is judged after a failure sign is judged, there is a high possibility that the fire judgment is an erroneous fire judgment due to a malfunction. Note that the processing to stop the transmission of the fire signal can also be omitted.

[0064] Furthermore, when the fire judgment unit 86 receives an internal status request command signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it controls the generation and transmission of failure sign information indicating the number of occurrences N of failure signs obtained at that time, and the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 is used to evaluate the reliability of the fire detector 12 based on the number of occurrences N of failure signs extracted from the acquired failure sign information, and to determine whether the fire detector 12 is reliable or has deteriorated reliability. Note that the deterioration in reliability may be divided into multiple stages depending on the degree of deterioration, so that, for example, a state of deteriorated reliability can be distinguished from a state of no reliability.

[0065] The number of occurrences N of the failure signs counted by the counter is reset at predetermined intervals or when a predetermined period has elapsed since the failure signs were counted. However, the number of occurrences N of the failure signs before the reset may be stored as failure sign information.

[0066] (Sensitivity test) The detector control unit 54 has the function of a sensitivity test unit 88, which is a function realized by executing a program. The sensitivity test unit 88 operates when it receives a test command signal specifying its own address from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 via the transmission unit 56, and instructs the test light emission drive unit 76 to sequentially drive the internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L to emit light, thereby performing a sensitivity test of the fire detection units 60R and 60L. Note that the internal test light sources 78R, 80R, and 82R and the internal test light sources 78L, 80L, and 82L may each be shared by a single light source.

[0067] For example, taking the circuit system of the sensor unit 64 and amplification processing unit 66 in the right eye fire detection unit 60R as an example, the test light emission driving unit 76 drives the internal test light source 78R to emit light, causing flame-simulated light (infrared light simulating a flame) equivalent to a fire flame to be incident on the sensor unit 64.

[0068] For the circuit blocks of the sensor unit 64 and the amplification processing unit 66, a reference light reception value from an initial sensitivity test at the time of shipment from the factory is stored in memory, and the detected light reception value obtained in the sensitivity test at system startup roughly matches the reference light reception value, and the detection sensitivity coefficient obtained by dividing the detected light reception value by the reference light reception value is 1. As the operating period passes, the detected light reception value gradually decreases, and the detection sensitivity coefficient decreases to 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, and so on.

[0069] When the detection sensitivity coefficient falls to 1 or less in this way, the sensitivity testing unit 88 calculates a correction coefficient, which is the reciprocal of the detection sensitivity coefficient, and stores it in memory. The sensitivity is corrected by multiplying the received light value detected during subsequent operation by the correction coefficient, and the fire detection unit 86 determines whether a fire has occurred based on the sensitivity-corrected received light value.

[0070] In addition, the sensitivity test unit 88 is preset with a sensitivity correction limit threshold value corresponding to the correction coefficient that is the limit of sensitivity correction, for example, a sensitivity correction limit threshold value of 0.5, and if the sensitivity coefficient obtained in the sensitivity test is equal to or less than the sensitivity correction limit threshold value, it determines that the sensitivity of the sensor unit 64 is abnormal, and instructs the transmission unit 56 to set information indicating the sensitivity abnormality in the response signal to a call signal that matches its own address, and controls the transmission unit 56 to transmit a sensitivity abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10.

[0071] In addition, the sensitivity test unit 88 is preset with a sensitivity abnormality prediction threshold of, for example, 0.6, corresponding to the sensitivity coefficient that indicates a sign of a sensitivity abnormality before the sensitivity correction limit is reached, and if the detection sensitivity coefficient obtained in the sensitivity test is equal to or falls below the sensitivity abnormality prediction threshold, it is determined to be a sign of a sensitivity abnormality state that is likely to make it impossible to correct sensitivity in the near future, and instructs the transmission unit 56 to send a sensitivity abnormality prediction signal that indicates a sign of a sensitivity abnormality to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to alert the same.

[0072] In addition, if the sensitivity testing unit 88 detects a sign of sensitivity abnormality, this may be regarded as one of the signs of failure, and the counter in the fire judgment unit 86 may perform a counting operation to increase the number of occurrences N of the signs of failure.

[0073] In addition, if the detection sensitivity coefficient increases to 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. as the operation period progresses, it is corrected in the same way, and when it reaches its limit, it is deemed to be abnormal.

[0074] Sensitivity tests are also conducted on the circuit systems of the sensor unit 68 and the amplification processing unit 70, and the sensor unit 72 and the amplification processing unit 74. Similarly, a sensitivity test is conducted on the left eye fire detection unit 60L by driving the internal test light sources 78L, 80L, and 82L to emit light using the test light emission driving unit 76.

[0075] (Stain test) The detector control unit 54 is provided with the function of a dirt test unit 90, which is a function realized by executing a program. As with the sensitivity test, the dirt test unit 90 operates when it receives a test instruction signal specifying its own address from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 via the transmission unit 56, and instructs the test light emission drive unit 76 to sequentially drive the external test light sources 84R, 84L to emit light and perform a dirt test on the light-transmitting windows 50R, 50L.

[0076] For example, in the case of a stain test on the light-transmitting window 50R, the test light emission drive unit 76 drives the external test light source 84R to emit light, causing simulated flame light equivalent to a fire flame to be incident on the sensor unit 64 through the test light source light-transmitting window 52R and the light-transmitting window 50R. The test light source light-transmitting window 52R and the light-transmitting window 50R are free of stains when shipped from the factory, and the light reception value obtained in the stain test at that time is stored in memory as a reference light reception value and is used to calculate the light attenuation rate.

[0077] The detected light reception value obtained in the dirt test at system startup is approximately equal to the reference light reception value, and the light attenuation rate obtained by subtracting the detected light reception value from the reference light reception value and dividing the result by the reference light reception value is 0. As the operation period passes, dirt accumulates on the translucent window 50R, and the light attenuation rate gradually increases to 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, and so on.

[0078] When the light attenuation rate increases in this way, the dirt test unit 90 determines the light attenuation rate through a dirt test, and also determines a correction value which is the reciprocal of (1 - light attenuation rate) and stores it in memory.The light reception value detected in the subsequent operating state (the light reception value corrected by the correction value of the sensitivity test) is divided by the correction value to perform a dirt correction, and the fire judgment unit 86 judges a fire based on the dirt-corrected light reception value.

[0079] In addition, the dirt test unit 90 is preset with a dirt threshold value, for example, a dirt threshold value of 0.5, which is the light attenuation rate corresponding to the limit of dirt correction, and if the light attenuation rate obtained in the dirt test is equal to or exceeds the dirt threshold value, it determines that there is a dirt abnormality that makes it impossible to correct the dirt on the translucent window 50R, and instructs the transmission unit 56 to set dirt abnormality information in the response signal to the call signal that matches its own address, and controls the transmission of a dirt signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to alert the user.

[0080] In addition, the dirt test unit 90 is preset with a dirt warning threshold, for example, a dirt warning threshold of 0.6, which is the light attenuation rate corresponding to the warning stage when dirt correction reaches its limit.If the light attenuation rate obtained in the dirt test is equal to or exceeds the dirt warning threshold, it is determined to be in a dirt warning state where there is a high possibility that dirt correction of the translucent window 50R will become impossible in the near future, and the unit instructs the transmission unit 56 to send a dirt warning signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to alert the user.

[0081] In addition, if the dirt testing unit 90 detects a sign of dirt, this may be considered as one of the signs of failure, and the counter in the fire detection unit 86 may be used to count the number of times N that the sign of failure has occurred.

[0082] (Fire detector control operation) FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing the control operation of the fire detector, which is the control operation by the fire determination unit 86 shown in FIG.

[0083] As shown in FIG. 5, taking the fire detection unit 60R of FIG. 4 as an example, the fire judgment unit 86 takes in the flame reception signal E1R, first non-flame reception signal E2R, and second non-flame reception signal E3R output from the amplification processing units 66, 70, and 74 by AD conversion in step S1, and if the flame reception signal E1R is equal to or greater than a predetermined value in step S2, proceeds to step S3, where the ratio (E1R / E2R) of the flame reception signal E1R to the first non-flame reception signal E2R is calculated. If this is equal to or greater than the predetermined value, the first stage of fire judgment conditions is satisfied and the process proceeds to step S4, and in step S4 the ratio (E1R / E3R) of the flame reception signal E1R to the second non-flame reception signal E3R is calculated. If this is equal to or greater than the predetermined value, the second stage of fire judgment conditions is satisfied and the process proceeds to step S5.

[0084] Next, in step S5, the fire detection unit 86 performs a fast Fourier transform (FFT calculation) of the flame reception signal E1R, and if in step S6 the relative intensity ratio between the low frequency components of, for example, 4 Hz or less and the high frequency components of more than 4 Hz and less than 8 Hz is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, it determines that the third stage fire detection conditions are met and proceeds to step S7, where it determines whether the first stage to third stage fire detection conditions in steps S1 to S6 have been met consecutively for a predetermined accumulated number of times threshold.

[0085] Next, if the accumulation count threshold as a predetermined fire judgment accumulation condition is met in step S7, the fire judgment unit 86 proceeds to step S8, judges it to be a fire, and transmits a fire signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to perform fire processing. Next, if it determines in step S9 that a fire recovery signal (recovery instruction signal) has been received from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, then in step S10 the fire detection is restored to the initial state and the process returns to step S1.

[0086] On the other hand, if the first stage fire judgment conditions are not met in step S3, the fire judgment unit 86 judges that a failure sign has occurred, proceeds to step S11, and increments the counter N that counts the number of times a failure sign has occurred by +1.If the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred is less than the predetermined threshold number Nth in step S12, the process repeats from step S1.

[0087] Furthermore, if the fire judgment unit 86 determines that the first stage fire judgment conditions in step S3 are satisfied but the second stage fire judgment conditions in step S4 are not satisfied, it proceeds to step S11 to increment the counter N that counts the number of times a failure sign has occurred by +1, and if the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred is less than a predetermined threshold number Nth in step S12, it repeats the processing from step S1.

[0088] Furthermore, if the fire judgment conditions for the first stage of step S3 and the second stage of step S4 are met but the fire judgment conditions for the third stage of step S6 are not met, the fire judgment unit 86 proceeds to step S11 and increments the counter N that counts the number of times a failure sign has occurred by +1, and if the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred is less than the predetermined threshold number Nth in step S12, the processing from step S1 is repeated.

[0089] By repeatedly counting the number of times a failure sign has occurred in this manner, the fire judgment unit 86 judges (confirms) that it is a failure sign when the failure sign judgment accumulation condition is met in step S12, where the number of times N of failure signs has occurred is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold number Nth, and proceeds to step S13 to send a failure sign signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to notify it, and then performs the predetermined failure sign processing in step S14.

[0090] In step S13, a determination of whether the failure sign determination accumulation condition in step S12 is satisfied may be added to the failure sign determination accumulation condition in step S12, that is, whether the number of times that a failure sign has been determined in step S12 reaches a predetermined threshold number.

[0091] Furthermore, the failure prediction process tightens the fire determination accumulation condition by, for example, increasing the accumulation count threshold in step S7. Furthermore, the fire detector 12 stops at least the latter of the monitoring operations in steps S1 to S7 and the transmission of the fire signal in step S8.

[0092] If the relative ratio is less than the predetermined value in step S3, the process may return to step S1, and if it is determined in step S7 that the fire determination accumulation condition is not satisfied, the process may proceed to step S11.

[0093] In addition, when the fire judgment unit 86 receives an internal status request command from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 during control operation, it responds by transmitting information regarding (indicating) the number of occurrences of failure signs N that are being counted by the counter at that time as failure sign information, which the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 uses to judge the reliability of the fire detector 12.

[0094] [Disaster prevention receiving panel] (Outline of the disaster prevention receiving panel) Figure 6 is a block diagram showing an outline of the functional configuration of the disaster prevention receiving panel. As shown in Figure 6, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 is equipped with a panel control unit 34. The panel control unit 34 has functions that are realized by, for example, executing a program, and uses, as hardware, a computer circuit equipped with a CPU, memory, various input / output ports, etc.

[0095] Transmission units 36a and 36b are provided for the panel control unit 34, and multiple fire detectors 12 installed in the up-line tunnel 1a and the down-line tunnel 1b are connected to signal lines 14a and 14b drawn from the transmission units 36a and 36b, respectively.

[0096] The panel control unit 34 is also provided with an alarm unit 38 equipped with a speaker, alarm indicator lights, etc., a display unit 40 equipped with an LCD display, a printer, etc., an operation unit 41 equipped with various switches, etc., and a modem 42 connecting the IG slave station equipment 20, and further with an IO unit 43 connected to the fire pump equipment 16, cooling pump equipment 18, ventilation equipment 22, alarm display board equipment 24, radio rebroadcasting equipment 26, television monitoring equipment 28, and lighting equipment 30 shown in Figure 1.

[0097] The panel control unit 34 is provided with the function of a fire monitoring control unit 48 as a function realized by executing a program.

[0098] The fire monitoring control unit 48 instructs the transmission units 36a, 36b to repeatedly send call signals including polling commands that sequentially specify the addresses of the fire detectors 12 via the signal lines 14a, 14b, and when the fire detector 12 receives a call signal that matches its own address, it replies with a response signal such as a fire signal, a sensitivity abnormality warning signal, a sensitivity abnormality signal, a contamination warning signal, or a contamination signal.

[0099] In addition, if the fire monitoring control unit 48 determines that there is a fire based on receiving a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it performs predetermined fire processing including outputting a fire alarm by the alarm unit 38, linking control of other equipment via the IO unit 43, for example displaying a no entry alarm by the alarm display board equipment 24, and transmitting a fire notification signal to the remote monitoring control equipment 32.

[0100] In addition, when the system is started up or at predetermined intervals during operation (for example, once a day, every 24 hours), the fire monitoring control unit 48 transmits test instruction signals sequentially specifying the addresses of the fire detectors 12, causes the fire detectors 12 to perform sensitivity tests and contamination tests, and responds with the results of each test.For example, if a response signal indicating a sensor failure is received, the fire monitoring control unit 48 controls the alarm unit 38 to sound an alarm, the display unit 40 to display a message on its screen, and the display unit 40 to print out a sensor failure alarm specifying the address of the fire detector 12.

[0101] In addition, when the fire monitoring control unit 48 receives a response signal indicating a contamination abnormality obtained by a contamination test of the fire detector 12, it controls the alarm unit 38 to issue an alarm sound, the display unit 40 to display a message on its screen, and the display unit 40 to print out a contamination alarm that identifies the address of the fire detector.

[0102] In addition, when the fire monitoring control unit 48 receives a response signal indicating a sensor failure or contamination abnormality obtained through the sensitivity test and contamination test of the fire detector 12, it transmits a transfer signal from the modem 42 to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 via the IG slave station equipment 20 shown in Figure 1, and controls the issuance of a failure alarm or abnormality alarm.

[0103] (Fire Judgment and Control) When the fire monitoring control unit 48 receives a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it sends an internal status request command signal specifying the address of the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal, obtains failure sign information including information indicating the number of failure signs N that have occurred as counted by the counter of the fire detector 12, and based on this, evaluates the reliability of the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal and determines whether it is reliable or has lost reliability.

[0104] The fire monitoring control unit 48 evaluates the reliability of the fire detector 12 by determining that the detector is reliable if, for example, the number of occurrences N of a failure sign of the fire detector 12 acquired and extracted as failure sign information is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold number Nref set as a reliability judgment accumulation condition, and determining that the reliability has decreased if the number of occurrences N is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold number Nref or exceeds the threshold number Nref.

[0105] If the fire detector 12 is to be prevented from transmitting a fire signal when it determines that a failure sign has occurred, for example, the threshold number Nref for setting the reliability judgment accumulation condition can be set to a value lower than the threshold number Nth set as the failure sign judgment accumulation condition in the fire judgment unit 86 shown in Figure 4.

[0106] When the fire monitoring control unit 48 determines that the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal is reliable, it sends a fire recovery command signal to the fire detector 12 to restore it, and if it receives a fire signal again, it determines that there is a fire, and performs predetermined fire processing including outputting a fire alarm, controlling the linkage of other equipment including displaying a no-entry alarm by at least the alarm display board equipment 24, and sending a fire report signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0107] On the other hand, when the fire monitoring control unit 48 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal has decreased, it sends an accumulation condition change command signal (accumulation condition tightening command) to the fire detector 12 to increase the accumulation count threshold that sets the first fire judgment accumulation condition (accumulation condition of step S7 in Figure 5) of the fire detector 12, thereby changing it to a stricter second fire judgment accumulation condition (accumulation condition that is more difficult to reach a fire judgment), specifically, for example, by increasing the accumulation count threshold to essentially make it less sensitive to fire, and then sends a recovery command signal to restore it.

[0108] In this state, when the fire monitoring control unit 48 receives a second fire signal due to the satisfaction of the second fire judgment accumulation condition from the fire detector 12 that sent the first fire signal with the fire judgment accumulation condition changed, and / or receives a fire signal from an adjacent fire detector 12 that is overlappingly monitoring the same detection area as the fire detector 12 that sent the first fire signal, it determines that there is a fire, and performs predetermined fire processing including outputting a fire alarm, controlling the linkage of other equipment including displaying a no entry alarm by at least the alarm display board equipment 24, and sending a fire report signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0109] In this way, when the fire monitoring control unit 48 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that sent a fire signal has decreased, even if the fire detector 12 judges that there is a fire due to a sign of a malfunction other than a fire and sends a fire signal, the fire judgment accumulation conditions of the fire detector in question are strictly changed, so that the possibility of the fire detector sending a fire signal again due to an unknown non-fire factor after recovery is low.In addition, at this time, the reliability of the adjacent fire detector 12 has not decreased, and the possibility of it sending a fire signal when there is no actual fire is extremely low.By determining that there is a fire when a fire signal is received from one or both of the fire detector 12 that has sent the first fire signal and recovered and the adjacent fire detector 12a, it is possible to reliably prevent the fire from being judged as a fire and fire treatment being carried out even when there is no actual fire.

[0110] In addition, if the fire monitoring control unit 48 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal has decreased and then fails to make a fire judgment based on the fire detector 12 and / or the adjacent fire detector 12a, it controls the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 to send a non-fire notification signal indicating that a non-fire (false) fire signal has been received from the fire detector 12, thereby alerting the equipment.

[0111] This allows the management personnel at the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 to know when the reliability of the fire detector 12 has decreased, which could result in a false fire alarm, and can be used to improve the efficiency of tunnel operation and management, such as by strengthening inspections of the fire detector 12.

[0112] Furthermore, if the fire monitoring control unit 48 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal has decreased, it may send an accumulation condition change command signal (accumulation condition relaxation command) to adjacent fire detectors 12 that are overlappingly monitoring the detection area of ​​the fire detector 12 in question, thereby lowering the accumulation count threshold in step S7 of Figure 5, thereby changing the first fire judgment accumulation condition to a third fire judgment accumulation condition that relaxes the first fire judgment accumulation condition (making it easier to reach a fire judgment), and essentially increasing the sensitivity to fires.

[0113] Specifically, for example, by lowering the accumulation count threshold set as the first fire judgment accumulation condition of the adjacent fire detector 12 and changing it to the third fire judgment accumulation condition, in the event of an actual fire, a fire signal will be quickly transmitted by the adjacent fire detector 12a, and the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal and was determined to have a reduced reliability will be able to quickly deal with the fire by transmitting a fire signal again after recovery.

[0114] If the fire detector 12 can transmit a fire signal that distinguishes between the right and left eyes, for example, the left eye of a fire detector that is overlappingly monitoring the detection area of ​​the right eye of this fire detector 12 with its left eye can be considered as the adjacent fire detector 12. If the right eye cannot be distinguished from the left eye, either of the adjacent fire detectors 12 can be considered as the adjacent fire detector 12.

[0115] [Control operation of tunnel disaster prevention system] (Fire detectors are reliable) FIG. 7 is a time chart showing the control operation when the disaster prevention receiving panel determines that the fire detector is reliable.

[0116] 7, when the fire detector 12 determines that a fire has occurred in step S21, the process proceeds to step S22 and transmits a fire signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10. When the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives the fire signal from the fire detector 12, it transmits an internal state request command signal to the fire detector 12 in step S23, and in response, the fire detector 12 generates failure sign information including information indicating the number N of occurrences of failure signs that are being counted by a counter at that time, and transmits the information to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S24.

[0117] The disaster prevention receiving panel 10, which has received the failure sign information from the fire detector 12, evaluates reliability based on the number of occurrences N of failure signs extracted from the failure sign information in step S25, and if it determines that the information is reliable in step S26, proceeds to step S27, sends a recovery command signal to the fire detector 12, and restores the information in step S28.If the fire detector 12 again determines that there is a fire in step S29 and sends a fire signal in step S30, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, which has received this fire signal, determines that there is a fire in step S31 and performs prescribed fire processing including outputting a fire alarm, controlling the equipment in conjunction with at least the display of a no-entry alarm by the alarm display board equipment 24, and sending a fire report signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0118] (Decreased reliability of fire detectors) FIG. 8 is a time chart showing the control operation when the disaster prevention receiving panel determines that the reliability of the fire detector has decreased.

[0119] The processing of steps S41 to S45 in Fig. 8 is the same as the processing of steps S21 to S25 in Fig. 7. In Fig. 8, reliability is evaluated in step S45 based on the number of occurrences N of the failure sign extracted from the failure sign information, and if it is determined in step S46 that the reliability has decreased, the process proceeds to step S47, in which an accumulation condition change command signal for relaxing the fire determination accumulation condition for the overlappingly monitored detection area is transmitted to adjacent fire detectors 12 that are overlappingly monitoring the detection area corresponding to the fire detection unit that caused the decrease in reliability of the fire detector 12 whose reliability has been determined to have decreased, specifically, an accumulation condition change command signal for decreasing the accumulation count threshold that serves as the fire determination accumulation condition in step S7 in Fig. 5, and at the same time, an accumulation condition change command signal for changing the first fire determination accumulation condition corresponding to the fire detection unit that caused the transmission of the first fire signal to a stricter second fire determination accumulation condition, specifically, an accumulation condition change command signal for increasing the accumulation count threshold for fire determination, is transmitted to the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal.

[0120] Adjacent fire detectors 12 (on either side or both sides) that receive the accumulation condition change command signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 relax the fire judgment accumulation conditions by lowering the accumulation count threshold in step S48, which effectively increases the fire sensitivity, and if there is an actual fire, it quickly determines that there is a fire in step S49 and transmits a fire signal in step S50.

[0121] Furthermore, the fire detector 12 that receives the accumulation condition change command signal to increase the accumulation count threshold from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 increases the accumulation count threshold in step S51, thereby effectively lowering the fire sensitivity. Next, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 transmits a recovery command signal to the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal in step S52, and the fire detector 12 that receives this signal is temporarily restored in step S53. If an actual fire is still occurring at this time, the fire detector 12 that lowered its sensitivity will again determine that there is a fire in step S54 and transmit a fire signal again in step S55.

[0122] If the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives, before the predetermined time has elapsed in step S57, either a second fire signal from the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal in step S56 or a fire signal from an adjacent fire detector 12 (one or both, if there are two adjacent fire detectors) whose fire judgment accumulation conditions have been changed to stricter conditions, the process proceeds to step S58, where it performs predetermined fire processing including outputting a fire alarm, controlling the equipment interlocking including displaying a no-entry alarm by at least the alarm display board equipment 24, and transmitting a fire alarm transfer signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32. Here, the predetermined time in step S57 is a time corresponding to the accumulation time taking into account the accumulation count threshold increased in step S51.

[0123] In addition, in a system that can distinguish between the right and left eyes, fire treatment can be performed when a fire signal is received from one unit (the eye monitoring the detection area) that is overlapping and monitoring the detection area of ​​the eye where a fire is believed to have occurred.

[0124] On the other hand, if a predetermined time has elapsed in step S57 without determining whether a second fire signal has been received from the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal in step S57 or a fire signal from an adjacent fire detector 12, the process proceeds to step S59, and a non-fire alarm transfer signal indicating that a non-fire fire signal has been received from the fire detector 12 is transmitted to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 to alert the user.

[0125] [Example of determining reliability using fire detectors] In the above embodiment, when the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives a fire signal, it obtains failure indication information including information indicating the number of times failure indications have occurred from the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal, and evaluates the reliability of the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal to determine whether it is reliable or has decreased reliability.However, in another embodiment, the reliability may be evaluated on the fire detector 12 side from the number of times failure indications have occurred to determine whether it is reliable or has decreased reliability.

[0126] That is, the fire judgment unit 86 of the fire detector 12 shown in Figure 4, as shown in the control operation of Figure 5, calculates the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred in step S11, and when it receives an internal status request command signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 after transmitting the fire signal, it compares the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred that it is calculating with a predetermined threshold number of times Nref that has been set as a reliability judgment accumulation condition, and if the number of times N is less than the predetermined threshold number of times Nref or is below the threshold number of times Nref, it judges that there is reliability, and if the number of times N is more than the predetermined threshold number of times Nref or exceeds the threshold number of times Nref, it judges that there is a decrease in reliability, and transmits reliability information including information showing the reliability judgment result to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10.

[0127] In the reliability determination process in step S25 of Fig. 7 and in step S45 of Fig. 8, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 only needs to extract the reliability determination result from the reliability information acquired from the fire detector 12, and the rest is the same as in the above-described embodiment. By performing the reliability determination on the fire detector 12 side in this way, the processing load on the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 side can be reduced.

[0128] (Control operation of disaster prevention receiving panel when fire detector failure signs are detected) Figure 9 is a time chart showing the control operation of the disaster prevention receiving panel when a fire detector detects a malfunction sign and determines that it is a malfunction sign. Note that even if the fire detector determines that it is a malfunction sign, it does not stop sending the fire signal as a malfunction sign processing, but instead sends the fire signal if it determines that there is a fire.

[0129] 9, if the number of occurrences N of a failure sign in fire detector 12 reaches a predetermined threshold Nth in step S61 and the fire detector 12 determines (confirms) that the failure sign is a failure sign, a failure sign signal is sent to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S62, and if failure sign processing is to be performed, the predetermined failure sign processing is performed in step S62a, but as mentioned above, in order to explain the subsequent control, this example does not involve stopping the transmission of the fire signal as failure sign processing. Having received the failure sign signal from the fire detector 12, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 notifies the fire detector 12 that a failure sign has occurred by displaying an alarm on a display or the like in step S63, and then transmits a failure sign transfer signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 to notify the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 in step S64.

[0130] In this state, if the fire detector 12 determines that there is a fire in step S65 and transmits a fire signal in step S66, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 determines in step S67 whether or not the fire detector 12 has detected signs of a malfunction, and if the fire detector 12 has not detected signs of a malfunction, proceeds to step S68 and performs predetermined fire processing including outputting a fire alarm, controlling the linkage of other equipment including displaying a no-entry alarm by the alarm display board equipment 24, and transmitting a fire alarm transfer signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0131] On the other hand, if it is determined in step S67 that the second fire signal was sent from the fire detector 12 in which a malfunction sign was detected, the process proceeds to step S69, where it is determined to be a non-fire alarm, no fire handling is performed, and instead, for example, the reception of a non-fire alarm is notified, and then the process proceeds to step S70, where a non-fire alarm transfer signal indicating a malfunction of the fire detector 12 is transmitted to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 as malfunction information of the fire detector 12, causing the alarm to be issued.

[0132] It should be noted that if the fire detector 12 has stopped transmitting the fire signal as a failure sign processing by the fire determination unit 86, the processing from step S65 onwards is not performed.

[0133] [Embodiment for determining reliability for each tunnel or section] In the above embodiment, reliability is determined for each fire detector 12. However, in another embodiment, reliability may be evaluated for each tunnel, signal system, or section based on failure sign information from multiple fire detectors 12 grouped by tunnel, signal system, or predetermined section of a tunnel, and a determination may be made as to whether reliability is present or has decreased.

[0134] For this reason, when judging reliability for each section of a tunnel, for example, when the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives a fire signal from a fire detector 12, it sends an internal information request command signal to multiple fire detectors 12 grouped in the section to which the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal belongs, receives each of the failure sign information, obtains the number of times N1, N2, ... Nn that the failure sign has occurred from this information, calculates the average number Nave of the number of times N1, N2, ... Nn that the failure sign has occurred and compares it with a predetermined threshold number Nref, determines that there is reliability if the average number Nave is less than or equal to the predetermined threshold number Nref, and determines that there is reduced reliability if the average number Nref is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold number Nref, and performs the same control operation as in the above embodiment depending on the reliability judgment result.

[0135] This embodiment evaluates the reliability of the fire detector 12 based on differences in environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and electrical noise that are specific to each section within the tunnel, and determines whether the detector is reliable or has a reduced reliability. The result of this evaluation and information indicating the Nref are temporarily stored as reliability information.

[0136] Furthermore, when judging reliability on a tunnel-by-tunnel basis, for example, when the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it sends an internal information request command signal to all fire detectors 12 installed in the tunnel, obtains the number of occurrences of failure signs N1, N2, ... Nn as all failure sign information, calculates the average number Nave, judges the number to be reliable if it is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold number Nref, and judges the number to be reliable if it is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold number Nref, and performs the same control operation as in the above embodiment depending on the reliability judgment result.

[0137] Here, in the embodiments of Figures 7 and 8 and this embodiment in which reliability information is generated for each tunnel, each signal system, and each section, when the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 receives a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it acquires failure sign information from the fire detector 12 or the fire detector of the tunnel, signal system, or section, but it is also possible to acquire failure sign information prior to receiving the fire signal and perform each process related to receiving the fire signal based on this.

[0138] Furthermore, when determining reliability for each system, the average number of occurrences of failure signs of the fire detector 12 for each signal line 14a, 14b is calculated in the same manner, and reliability is determined based on this. Note that the failure sign information is not limited to the number of occurrences of failure signs, and may be a moving average number of occurrences, the frequency of occurrence of failure signs, or the rate of occurrence for a predetermined period, etc.

[0139] [Another embodiment of failure sign determination] (Determining signs of failure through sensitivity testing) FIG. 10 is an explanatory diagram showing the peak level of the received light signal and the number of occurrences of signs of failure when an internal test light source is driven in a sensitivity test of a fire detector.

[0140] The sensitivity test section 88 provided in the detector control section 54 of the fire detector 12 shown in Figure 4 operates when it receives a test instruction signal transmitted periodically (for example, once a day) from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and instructs the test light emission drive section 76 to perform light emission drive by blinking the internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L in sequence at, for example, 2 Hz for a predetermined period of time (for example, 1 second), thereby irradiating the fire detection sections 60R and 60L with flame-simulated light (test light) equivalent to a fire flame, thereby performing a sensitivity test.

[0141] The sensitivity test by the sensitivity test unit 88 is the same as that already explained with reference to Fig. 4. In addition, the sensitivity test unit 88 of this embodiment detects the peak levels of each of the flame light reception signal E1R, first non-flame light reception signal E2R, and second non-flame light reception signal E3R output from the fire detection unit 60R in the sensitivity test, and the flame light reception signal E1L, first non-flame light reception signal E2L, and second non-flame light reception signal E3L output from the fire detection unit 60L during the sensitivity test. As shown by the black dots in Fig. 10(A), if the peak level detected, for example, once a day is outside a predetermined normal range 94 based on an initial value 92 of the peak level detected in an undegraded state at the time of shipment from the factory, but is not greater than a predetermined fault threshold 96 or is not below the fault threshold 96 and does not satisfy the fault determination condition, that is, if it is within a fault prediction range 98, it is determined to be a fault prediction, and performs control to count the number of occurrences N of the fault prediction using a counter, as shown in Fig. 10(B).

[0142] Here, the normal range 94 of the received light signal is a range between an upper limit value 94a and a lower limit value 94b, for example, centered on the initial value 92, and is, for example, ±10 percent of the initial value 92. The failure threshold 96 is, for example, a value that is about 50 percent of the initial value 92.

[0143] The failure sign range is, for example, a range from the upper limit 94a of the normal range 94 to the initial value 92 plus 50 percent of the initial value 92, i.e., (Upper limit 94a) or less {(initial value 92) + (50 percent of initial value 92)} It is also possible to add a range to determine whether a fault is present.

[0144] On the other hand, the fire judgment unit 86 compares the number of occurrences N of a failure sign counted by the counter of the sensitivity test unit 88 with a predetermined threshold number Nth set as a failure sign judgment accumulation condition, and when the number of occurrences N of a failure sign is equal to or exceeds the predetermined threshold Nth and satisfies the failure sign judgment accumulation condition, it judges (confirms) it as a failure sign, transmits a failure sign signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and then performs predetermined failure sign processing. The failure sign processing by the fire judgment unit 86 is, for example, processing to stop the transmission of the fire signal.

[0145] In addition, when the fire judgment unit 86 receives an internal status request command signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it controls the transmission of precursor failure information including information indicating the number of times N that a precursor failure has occurred that has been obtained at that time, and extracts the number of times N that a precursor failure has occurred in the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and based on this, evaluates the reliability of the fire detector 12 that sent the fire signal and determines whether it is reliable or has decreased reliability.

[0146] The number of occurrences N of the failure signs counted by the counter is reset, for example, at predetermined intervals or when a predetermined period has elapsed since the failure signs were counted. The number of occurrences N of the failure signs before the reset may be stored as a failure sign information history.

[0147] (Fire detector sensitivity test operation) FIG. 11 is a flowchart showing a sensitivity test of a fire detector accompanied by a judgment of a sign of failure, and is a control operation performed by the sensitivity test unit 88 and the fire judgment unit 86 of the fire detector 12 shown in FIG.

[0148] As shown in Figure 11, taking the fire detection unit 60R of Figure 4 as an example, the sensitivity test unit 88 determines in step S71 whether it has received a test instruction signal (indicating its own address) sent once a day from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 by specifying an address in order, and proceeds to step S72, where it instructs the test light emission drive unit 76 to flash the internal test light source 78R at 2 Hz for a predetermined period (for example, 1 second) to emit flame-simulating light (test light) equivalent to a fire flame into the sensor unit 64.

[0149] Next, the sensitivity test unit 88 proceeds to step S73, where it detects the peak level of the flame light reception signal (light reception signal) E1R due to the test light output from the amplification processing unit 66, and in step S74 determines whether it is within the normal range 94 shown in Figure 10(A).If it is within the normal range 94, it proceeds to step S75, where it calculates a detection sensitivity coefficient by dividing, for example, the peak level of the light reception signal by the initial value (reference light reception value) 92 stored during the initial sensitivity test at the time of shipment from the factory, and in step S77 it calculates and stores a correction coefficient for the light reception signal as the reciprocal of the detection sensitivity coefficient, and uses it to correct the light reception signal level.

[0150] Next, the sensitivity test unit 88 proceeds to step S77, and repeats the process from step S71 until the detection sensitivity coefficient calculated in step S75 reaches a predetermined sensitivity correction limit threshold (e.g., 0.5). Note that the correction limit in step S75 may be set to when the peak level is equal to or lower than the failure threshold, as in step S81.

[0151] If the sensitivity testing unit 88 determines in step S77 that the detection sensitivity coefficient has reached the sensitivity correction limit threshold, it repeats the processing from step S71 in step S78 until a predetermined sensitivity abnormality determination accumulation condition, for example a predetermined accumulation count threshold, is reached, and if the sensitivity abnormality determination accumulation condition of step S78 is satisfied, it transmits a sensitivity abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S79.

[0152] Next, the fire judgment unit 86 performs predetermined sensitivity abnormality processing in step S80 in response to the sensitivity abnormality determination made by the sensitivity test unit 88. This sensitivity abnormality processing is performed, for example, by increasing the accumulation count threshold that sets the fire judgment accumulation condition in the fire judgment unit 86 to effectively lower the fire sensitivity, or by stopping the transmission of the fire signal, because there is a high possibility that an erroneous fire judgment will be made due to a sensitivity abnormality (for example, a light receiving element failure or an electrical circuit failure accompanied by a sensitivity abnormality) after the sensitivity abnormality has been determined.

[0153] On the other hand, if the sensitivity test unit 88 determines in step S74 that the peak level of the light receiving signal E1R during the test is outside the normal range 94, it proceeds to step S81, and if the peak level is equal to or lower than the failure threshold 96 or is not lower than the failure threshold, that is, if it is within the failure sign range 98 shown in Figure 10(A), it determines that a failure sign has occurred and notifies this to the fire judgment unit 86. Note that the determination of the failure sign in step S81 is not limited to the peak level of the light receiving signal, and may also be made based on, for example, an integral value or an average level.

[0154] Next, the fire judgment unit 86, upon receiving notification of the failure sign judgment result from the sensitivity test unit 88, increments the counter N that counts the number of times a failure sign has occurred by +1 in step S82, and if the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred is less than or equal to the threshold number Nth set as a predetermined failure sign judgment accumulation condition in step S83, repeats the processing from step S71.

[0155] By repeatedly counting the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred in this manner, the fire judgment unit 86 judges (confirms) that a failure sign has occurred in step S83 when the number of times N that a failure sign has occurred becomes equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold number Nth and satisfies the failure sign judgment accumulation condition, proceeds to step S85, and transmits a failure sign signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to notify it, and then performs a predetermined failure sign processing in step S86.

[0156] This failure prediction process, for example, tightens the fire detection accumulation condition by increasing the accumulation count threshold set as the fire detection accumulation condition by the fire detection unit 86, thereby effectively lowering the fire sensitivity. Furthermore, even if the fire detection unit 86 subsequently detects a fire, it may stop transmitting the fire signal because there is a high possibility that the fire detection was erroneous due to a failure, and perform processing to prevent the generation of a false fire alarm.

[0157] In addition, when the fire judgment unit 86 receives an internal status request command from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it responds by transmitting failure sign information including information indicating the number N of occurrences of failure signs that are being counted by the counter at that time, and the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 extracts the number of occurrences of failure signs from the acquired failure sign information of the fire detector 12, evaluates the reliability, and determines whether the information is reliable or has decreased reliability.

[0158] On the other hand, if the sensitivity testing unit 88 determines in step S81 that the peak level of the received light signal has dropped below the failure threshold 96, it proceeds to step S78, repeats the processing from step S71 until it reaches a predetermined accumulation count threshold set as the sensitivity abnormality judgment accumulation condition, and when the sensitivity abnormality judgment accumulation condition of step S78 is satisfied, it transmits a sensitivity abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S79, and then performs a predetermined sensitivity abnormality processing in step S80.

[0159] This embodiment uses an example in which the number of occurrences of failure signs is determined by a periodic sensitivity test of a fire detector, but is not limited to this. It also includes tests performed at any time by operating a test command from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and appropriate tests other than sensitivity tests that activate the internal test light source. The same can be done for the left fire detection unit 60L. The same can also be done for the first non-flame light reception signals E2R, E2L and the second non-flame light reception signals E3R, E3L during testing.

[0160] [Fire detection unit and sensitivity testing unit determine signs of failure] In another embodiment of the fire detector 12 according to the present invention, the determination of a failure sign by the fire determination unit 86 shown in the flowchart of Figure 5 and the determination of a failure sign by the sensitivity test unit 88 shown in the flowchart of Figure 11 are combined, and the number of occurrences N of the failure signs determined by each unit are accumulated and counted.Failure sign information including information indicating the cumulative number of occurrences of failure signs is obtained by the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 from the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal, and reliability is evaluated from the cumulative number of occurrences of the extracted failure signs to determine whether there is reliability or whether reliability has decreased.

[0161] In addition, when the cumulative number of occurrences of a failure sign reaches or exceeds a predetermined threshold number Nth, satisfying the failure sign determination accumulation condition, the system determines that a failure sign has occurred and sends a failure sign signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to notify the user, and then performs the predetermined failure sign processing.

[0162] [Modifications of the present invention] (Fire detector) Although a three-wavelength fire detector is used as an example, other methods are also possible. For example, it may be a two-wavelength flame detector that detects infrared energy in the 4.5 μm band, which is the resonant radiation band of CO2, and in a wavelength band on the shorter wavelength side of that, for example, around 5.0 μm, and determines the presence or absence of a flame based on the relative ratio of the received light signals in these two wavelength bands.

[0163] (Changes in accumulation conditions) In addition, in the above embodiment, the fire detection accumulation conditions of the fire detector 12, for example, the fire detection accumulation count threshold, can be changed in two ways: the fire detector 12 itself increases the accumulation count threshold to tighten the failure sign judgment conditions (lower fire sensitivity) as a failure sign processing (step S14 in Figure 5), or the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 increases the accumulation count threshold to tighten the fire detection accumulation conditions (lower sensitivity) in response to an instruction when it determines that reliability has decreased (step S51 in Figure 8).If both of these are performed at the same time, the overall accumulation time is changed appropriately so as not to make it longer than necessary and delay the detection of a fire.

[0164] (P-type tunnel disaster prevention system) The above embodiment shows a so-called R-type tunnel disaster prevention system that monitors fires by connecting a fire detector with an address set to a signal line drawn from a disaster prevention receiving panel, but the present invention is not limited to this and is also applicable to a so-called P-type tunnel disaster prevention system in which a signal line is drawn from the disaster prevention receiving panel for each fire detector and a fire detector is connected to each signal line.

[0165] In a typical P-type tunnel disaster prevention system, it is not possible to communicate information such as the specific number of times a warning sign has occurred between the disaster prevention receiving panel and the fire detector, so the function of evaluating the reliability of the fire detector in the disaster prevention receiving panel shown in the above embodiment and determining whether it is reliable or has decreased reliability is provided on the fire detector side, and if the fire detector determines that reliability has decreased, the reliability information is sent to the disaster prevention receiving panel to notify the decrease in reliability, for example, by disconnecting the signal line or by providing a dedicated line for reliability decrease signals.

[0166] (others) The present invention also includes appropriate modifications that do not impair the objects and advantages thereof, and is not limited to the numerical values ​​shown in the above embodiments. [Explanation of symbols]

[0167] 1a: Up line tunnel 1b: Down line tunnel 10: Disaster prevention receiving panel 12: Fire detector 14a, 14b: Signal line 16: Fire pump equipment 18: Cooling pump equipment 20:IG slave station equipment 22: Ventilation equipment 24: Alarm display board equipment 26: Radio rebroadcasting equipment 28: TV monitoring equipment 30: Lighting equipment 32: Remote monitoring and control equipment 34: Panel control unit 36a, 36b: Transmission section 48: Fire monitoring control unit 50R,50L: Translucent window 52R, 52L: Translucent window for test light source 54: Detector control unit 56: Transmission unit 58: Power supply section 60R, 60L: Fire detection unit 64, 68, 72: Sensor section 66, 70, 74: Amplification processing section 76: Test light emission driver 78R, 78L, 80R, 80L, 82R, 82L: Internal test light source 84R, 84L: External test light source 86:Fire Judgment Department 88: Sensitivity test section 90: Soil test section

Claims

1. A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector by using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: The fire detector When a flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to a flame contained in the received light satisfies a predetermined condition, if a fire is not determined to be a fire in a fire determination performed to determine a fire, the fire detector does not determine that a fire has occurred and determines that a malfunction sign has occurred in the fire detector; A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, comprising counting the number of occurrences of the failure signs when it is determined that the failure signs have occurred.

2. A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector by using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: The fire detector When a flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to a flame contained in the received light satisfies a predetermined condition, if a fire is not determined to be a fire in a fire determination performed to determine a fire, the fire detector does not determine that a fire has occurred and determines that a malfunction sign has occurred in the fire detector; A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, comprising the steps of: incrementing a cumulative value of a count of the number of occurrences of the failure signs each time it is determined that the failure signs have occurred.

3. A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector by using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: The fire detector When a flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to a flame contained in the received light satisfies a predetermined condition, a fire is determined to be a fire in a fire determination performed to determine a fire; If the fire is not determined to be a fire in the fire determination, it is determined that a malfunction sign of the fire detector has occurred; A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, comprising counting the number of occurrences of the failure signs when it is determined that the failure signs have occurred.

4. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 3, comprising: The fire determination has a plurality of fire determination conditions, A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that if at least some of a plurality of fire determination conditions are not satisfied, the fire is not determined to exist.

5. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 4, comprising: A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that the fire determination includes a fire determination using fire determination conditions based on the flame reception signal and a non-flame reception signal obtained from light in a wavelength band different from the characteristic wavelength band contained in the received light.

6. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 5, comprising: The method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, wherein the fire determination includes a fire determination using a fire determination condition based on the frequency of the flame reception signal.

7. A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector by using the number of occurrences of a failure sign, comprising: The fire detector a detection unit for detecting an abnormality in the fire detector that affects a light reception value of a light reception signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit; When a predetermined value obtained using the light reception value satisfies a predetermined abnormality sign judgment condition stricter than the predetermined abnormality judgment condition for judging an abnormality of the fire detector, the predetermined value is judged to be an abnormality sign of the fire detector that affects the light reception value, A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that when it is determined that the fire detector is experiencing an abnormality, the abnormality is considered to be a sign of a failure of the fire detector, and the number of times the fire detector is determined to be an abnormality sign is counted as the number of occurrences of a failure sign.

8. 8. The method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to claim 7, A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that the fire detector transmits an abnormality signal when it determines that the fire detector is abnormal.

9. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 8, comprising: The fire detector determining that the failure sign is a failure sign when the number of occurrences of the failure sign satisfies a predetermined condition; A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, comprising transmitting a failure prediction signal when the failure prediction is determined to be present.

10. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 9, comprising: A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that the fire detector transmits failure sign information including the number of occurrences of the failure signs.

11. The method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to claim 10, The fire detector is connected to a disaster prevention receiving panel via a signal line. receiving the failure sign information from the fire detector; A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that the reliability of the fire detector is determined using the number of occurrences of the failure signs contained in the received failure sign information.

12. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 10, comprising: A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that the fire detector determines its own reliability using the number of occurrences of the failure signs.

13. A method for determining reliability of a fire detector according to any one of claims 1 to 12, comprising: A method for determining the reliability of a fire detector, characterized in that the fire detector resets the count of the number of times the failure signs have occurred when a predetermined period has elapsed since counting the number of times the failure signs have occurred.

Images