Monitoring systems and detectors

Abstract

To enable proper identification of predictive failure of detectors due to age-related deterioration without being affected by fluctuations in light-receiving signal levels caused by environmental factors that may occur over time during testing of the detectors.SOLUTION: A disaster prevention system includes: a failure prediction determination unit 46 that determines a light-receiving signal obtained from light received by a sensor unit of a fire detector 12 during a test in which a test light source of the fire detector 12 is driven to be a predictive failure when predetermined failure prediction determination conditions are satisfied; and a failure prediction determination condition changing unit 47 that changes the predetermined failure prediction determination conditions based on the test result information of the light-receiving signal obtained by the test. As the predetermined failure prediction determination conditions, a failure prediction range is set between a normal range and a failure range, and the failure prediction determination condition changing unit 47 changes the failure prediction range by changing the normal range without changing the failure range.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 5

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to a monitoring system such as a disaster prevention system that monitors abnormalities by a detector connected to a signal line drawn out from a disaster prevention receiver, and a detector of the monitoring system.

Background Art

[0002] Conventionally, for example, there is a tunnel disaster prevention system as a monitoring system for monitoring a fire in a tunnel.

[0003] Such a tunnel disaster prevention system is provided with a fire detector for monitoring a fire in a tunnel such as a tunnel for exclusive use of automobiles, etc., to protect people and vehicles from a fire accident occurring in the tunnel, and is connected to a signal line drawn out from a disaster prevention receiver to monitor a fire.

[0004] The fire detector has detection areas in both the left and right directions, and is continuously arranged at intervals of, for example, 25 m or 50 m along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel so that the detection areas with adjacent fire detectors are complementarily overlapped.

[0005] Further, the fire detector monitors radiation from a fire flame occurring in the tunnel, such as infrared rays, through a light-transmitting window, and performs a sensitivity test for checking the sensitivity of a light-receiving element and a dirt test for monitoring the dirt of the light-transmitting window in order to maintain the flame monitoring function.

[0006] However, with conventional fire detectors, if the operating period is long and the fire detector deteriorates, even if sensitivity tests do not detect sensitivity failures or fouling failures during fouling tests and the detector appears to be operating normally, there is a possibility that the fire detector may output a fire detection signal and a false fire alarm will be issued from the fire prevention receiving panel. In such cases, until it is confirmed that it is a false fire alarm, an entry prohibition warning must be issued using an alarm display board or similar equipment to prohibit vehicles from passing through the tunnel, and a person in charge must go to the site to confirm, which takes time and effort before tunnel passage can be resumed, and can have a significant impact, such as causing traffic congestion.

[0007] For this reason, a tunnel fire prevention system has been proposed in which the fire detector's deterioration is determined and reported based on environmental stresses such as temperature, humidity, shock vibration, and electrical noise at the fire prevention receiving panel. This allows for monitoring the deterioration of the fire detectors, enabling measures such as replacing a fire detector with a spare before a false fire alarm is issued.

[0008] Furthermore, conventional tunnel fire prevention systems, when a fire alarm receiver receives a fire signal from a fire detector, temporarily reset the fire detector after a predetermined time to prevent false alarms. Then, when a fire signal is received again within the predetermined time, it is determined to be a fire and an entry prohibition warning is issued via an alarm display board or similar equipment. [Prior art documents] [Patent Documents]

[0009] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2002-246962 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2016-128796 [Patent Document 3] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2018-169893 [Patent Document 4] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 06-282774 [Patent Document 5] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2018-147373 [Patent Document 6] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2017-034489 [Patent Document 7] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2017-049799 [Overview of the Initiative] [Problems that the invention aims to solve]

[0010] Incidentally, some conventional tunnel fire prevention systems, as described above, determine the degree of deterioration based on the received signal level during fire detector testing. However, in this case, the received signal level during testing fluctuates slowly due to influences such as seasonal ambient temperature, and the received signal level during testing may differ between winter and summer, for example, due to the influence of the temperature characteristics of each part involved in the test operation.

[0011] Therefore, it is necessary to understand the signs of fire detector failures, taking into account seasonal environmental factors. A sign of failure is a concept that indicates a state in which the detection sensor (or light sensor in the embodiment described later) or circuit components of the detector are likely to deteriorate, leading to a failure state such as the generation of noise signals or insufficient sensitivity; in other words, it is a sign that failure may occur in the near future.

[0012] The present invention aims to provide a monitoring system and a detector for the monitoring system that can appropriately identify signs of failure due to aging of a detector, without being affected by fluctuations in the received light signal level caused by changes in environmental factors over time during detector testing. [Means for solving the problem]

[0013] (Monitoring system) The present invention is a monitoring system that connects a detector to a receiving panel to monitor for abnormalities, A fault prediction unit determines a fault when the received light signal obtained from the light received by the sensor part of the detector during a test in which the test light source of the detector is driven satisfies predetermined fault prediction judgment conditions, A failure prediction condition changing unit that changes a predetermined failure prediction condition based on test result information of a received light signal obtained by a test, is provided, As a predetermined failure prediction condition, a normal range of the level of the received light signal that determines the detector as normal, and a normal range Lower limit A failure range of the level of the received light signal that targets a level of the received light signal lower than the above and determines a failure of the detector And the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the fault range Between to A failure prediction range of the level of the received light signal that is determined as a failure prediction is set, When the failure prediction condition changing unit changes the failure prediction range as a predetermined failure prediction condition, it changes the normal range without changing the failure range Upper and lower limits By doing so Normal range and It is characterized by changing the failure prediction range.

[0014] ( Failure prediction criteria Changing method) Failure prediction judgment conditions The changing unit acquires a reference value of the level of the received light signal based on the level of the received light signal within the normal range or the failure prediction range obtained by the test during a predetermined period as test result information, and sets a new normal range Set upper and lower limits, and create a new interval between the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the fault range. Failure prediction range. Furthermore, as a predetermined fault prediction criterion, a second fault range is set, which targets the level of the received light signal that is higher than the upper limit of the normal range, and a second fault prediction range is set between the upper limit of the normal range and the lower limit of the second fault range. The failure prediction condition modification unit further sets a new lower limit for the second failure range based on the reference value, and sets a new second failure prediction range between the upper limit of the normal range and the lower limit of the second failure range.

[0015] (Detector) Further, in another aspect of the present invention, a detector that tests its own normalcy by a test in which a test light source is driven, A failure prediction determination unit that determines a failure prediction when the received light signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit during the test satisfies a predetermined failure prediction condition, A failure prediction condition changing unit that changes a predetermined failure prediction condition based on test result information of the received light signal obtained by the test, is provided, As a predetermined failure prediction condition, a normal range of the level of the received light signal that determines the detector as normal, and a normal range Lower limitThe detection detector is considered to have malfunctioned if the received light signal level is lower than the specified range. And the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the fault range Between to A fault prediction range is set for the level of the received light signal that is judged to be a fault indicator. The fault prediction judgment condition changing unit changes the fault prediction range as a predetermined fault prediction judgment condition, without changing the fault range. Upper and lower limits By changing Normal range and The present invention is characterized by its ability to change the range of fault prediction indicators.

[0016] Furthermore, in the invention of the detector, the " Failure prediction criteria It has the characteristic of being a method of modification. [Effects of the Invention]

[0017] (Basic effects) The present invention relates to a monitoring system in which multiple detectors are connected to a receiving panel to monitor abnormalities. Each detector determines a malfunction when predetermined malfunction prediction conditions are met based on the light signal received during a test that drives a test light source. The receiving panel acquires test result information from each detector and, based on the acquired multiple test result information, determines which detector will change the malfunction prediction conditions. For example, in a tunnel disaster prevention system equipped with fire detectors, if the ambient temperature inside the tunnel fluctuates with the seasons, the malfunction prediction conditions are changed based on the test result information derived from the light signal received during the test. As a result, for example, Even if the received signal level during testing fluctuates due to seasonal environmental factors, the fault prediction criteria are changed to follow these fluctuations, making it possible to accurately determine fault signs from the received signal level during testing throughout the year. This allows operators to focus their inspections on fire detectors that are judged to be in a faulty state due to aging or other factors, enabling them to take appropriate action against those fire detectors and prevent false alarms. For example, in the case of a tunnel disaster prevention system, this can reduce secondary effects such as stopping tunnel traffic due to fire treatment accompanied by a tunnel entry prohibition alarm, compared to conventional systems.

[0018] Furthermore, the receiving panel determines which detectors to modify the fault prediction criteria for based on the test result information from each detector, thereby reducing the processing load on the detectors.

[0019] Furthermore, because the receiving panel comprehensively processes test result information from multiple detectors, for example, by dividing it into sections, signal systems, etc., it becomes possible to accurately determine fault precursors while avoiding the influence of environmental factors that occur in specific sections, signal systems, etc.

[0020] (Effect of generating test result information using averaging) Each detector generates test result information by averaging after excluding light signals that reach a predetermined singular level from the received light signals over a predetermined period. This allows for the generation of test result information that suppresses the influence of transiently affected light signals, and enables the fault prediction judgment conditions, which are modified based on the test result information, to be changed to more accurate conditions. [Brief explanation of the drawing]

[0021] [Figure 1] Diagram illustrating the overview of the tunnel disaster prevention system. [Figure 2] Diagram illustrating the detection area of ​​a fire detector. [Figure 3] Diagram showing the appearance of a fire detector. [Figure 4] Block diagram showing the general functional configuration of a fire detector. [Figure 5] Block diagram showing the general functional configuration of the disaster prevention receiver panel. [Figure 6] This diagram illustrates the setting of fault prediction criteria and the fault prediction operation based on the light reception level during testing. [Figure 7] This diagram illustrates the operation of the fault prediction judgment condition change unit. [Modes for carrying out the invention]

[0022] [Monitoring System] As an embodiment of the monitoring system of the present invention, a tunnel fire prevention system for monitoring fires inside a tunnel will be described as an example. Specifically, the case in which the space to be monitored is inside a tunnel, the abnormality to be monitored is a fire, the detector is a fire detector, and the receiving panel is a fire prevention receiving panel (fire signal receiving device) will be described.

[0023] Furthermore, the detector in this invention has the function of testing its own normality based on a light-receiving signal obtained by a self-mounted light-receiving element from test light generated by driving a self-mounted test light source, and the fire detector in the following embodiment also has the same function.

[0024] [Tunnel disaster prevention system] [Basic Concepts of the Embodiment] Figure 1 is an explanatory diagram showing an overview of the tunnel disaster prevention system. The basic concept of the tunnel disaster prevention system in this embodiment is that a fire detector 12 installed in the tunnel is connected to a disaster prevention receiving panel 10 via a signal line 14 to monitor fires in a detection area 15 within the monitored space, and the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 performs predetermined fire processing based on the fire signal from the fire detector 12. The tunnel disaster prevention system determines that the fire detector 12 is in danger of failure if predetermined failure prediction judgment conditions are met based on the received light signal when the test light source of the fire detector 12 is driven, generates test result information based on the level of the received light signal from the test of the fire detector 12, and changes the failure prediction judgment conditions based on the test result information.

[0025] As a result, the fault prediction criteria are changed based on test result information derived from the level of the received light signal during testing. Consequently, even if the level of the received light signal during testing fluctuates due to seasonal environmental factors, for example, the fault prediction criteria are adjusted to accommodate these fluctuations, making it possible to appropriately identify signs of fire detector failure throughout the year. This allows operators and other personnel to take appropriate measures such as inspection, repair, or replacement of fire detectors that have been identified as showing signs of failure, thereby preventing false alarms caused by, for example, the gradual deterioration of fire detectors over time.

[0026] Furthermore, the failure prediction judgment conditions are modified based on the trend of changes in the level of the received light signal obtained from the test result information of the fire detector 12. For example, if there is an increasing trend, the failure prediction judgment conditions are changed to match this increasing trend, and if there is a decreasing trend, the failure prediction judgment conditions are changed to match this decreasing trend. This makes it possible to appropriately judge failures without being affected by fluctuating environmental factors. A detailed explanation follows below.

[0027] [Overview of the Tunnel Disaster Prevention System] As shown in Figure 1, fire detectors 12 are installed inside the uphill tunnel 1a and downhill tunnel 1b of the expressway at intervals of, for example, 25 meters or 50 meters along the longitudinal walls of the tunnels. These detectors are connected to signal lines 14 drawn from a disaster prevention receiving panel 10 installed in a control room or the like, and each fire detector 12 is assigned a unique address. The signal lines 14 may include power lines.

[0028] Figure 2 is an explanatory diagram showing the detection area of ​​the fire detector. As shown in Figure 2, the fire detector 12 is equipped with two sets of fire detection units, a right eye and a left eye, and has a detection area 15 in both the upward and downward directions in the longitudinal direction of the tunnel, which is the space to be monitored. The detection areas of adjacent fire detectors 12 are arranged continuously along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel, for example, the right eye 13R and the left eye 13L overlap complementaryly, and the fire is detected by observing infrared radiation from flames associated with a fire that occurs within the detection area 15.

[0029] Furthermore, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 is equipped with fire pump equipment 16, cooling pump equipment for ducts 18, IG substation equipment 20, ventilation equipment 22, alarm display board equipment 24, radio rebroadcasting equipment 26, television monitoring equipment 28, and lighting equipment 30, and the fire detector 12 and the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 communicate via signal line 14 using a so-called R-type (Record-type) transmission method.

[0030] Here, the IG substation equipment 20 is a communication device that connects the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 and the remote monitoring and control equipment 32, which is a higher-level device located outside, via a network. The ventilation equipment 22 is a device that generates ventilation airflow in the longitudinal direction of the tunnel by operating jet fans installed on the ceiling side of the tunnel. The alarm display board equipment 24 is a device that displays information such as entry prohibition alarms due to fire to users on an electronic display board. The radio rebroadcasting equipment 26 is a device that allows drivers and others to receive information from the road administrator inside the tunnel. The television monitoring equipment 28 is a device that grasps the situation inside the tunnel when confirming the scale and location of a fire, activating water spray equipment, and guiding evacuations. The lighting equipment 30 is a device that drives and manages the lighting equipment inside the tunnel.

[0031] [Fire detector] (Appearance of a fire detector) Figure 3 is an explanatory diagram showing the external appearance of the fire detector, and Figure 4 is a block diagram showing the schematic of the functional configuration of the fire detector. As shown in Figure 3, the fire detector 12 has two sets of translucent windows 50R and 50L, separated on the left and right, in a sensor housing section 49 located at the top of the housing 48, and a sensor unit is built into each corresponding translucent window 50R and 50L. In addition, two sets of translucent windows 52R and 52L for test light sources, which house external test light sources used for soiling tests of the translucent windows 50R and 50L, are provided near the translucent windows 50R and 50L, in a position that allows a view of the sensor unit.

[0032] In the following explanation, the translucent window 50R may be referred to as the right eye translucent window 50R, and the translucent window 50L may be referred to as the left eye translucent window 50L.

[0033] (Outline configuration of a fire detector) As shown in Figure 4, the fire detector 12 is equipped with a detector control unit 54, a transmission unit 56, a power supply unit 58, two sets of fire detection units 60R and 60L (left and right), a test light emission drive unit 76, internal test light sources 78R, 80R, and 82R and 78L, 80L, and 82L used for sensitivity testing, and external test light sources 84R and 84L used for contamination testing. In the following description, fire detection unit 60R may be referred to as the right-eye fire detection unit 60R, and fire detection unit 60L may be referred to as the left-eye fire detection unit 60L.

[0034] The detector control unit 54 is a function that is realized, for example, by the execution of a program, and the hardware used is a computer circuit equipped with a CPU, memory, various input / output ports, etc.

[0035] The transmission unit 56 is connected to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 shown in Figure 1 by the transmission line S of the signal line 14 and the transmission common line SC, and various signals are transmitted and received by R-type transmission.

[0036] The power supply unit 58 receives power from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 shown in Figure 1 via power line B and power common line BC included in the signal line 14, and a predetermined power 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, and the test light emission drive unit 76.

[0037] The test light emission drive unit 76 is connected to internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L used for testing, as well as to external test light sources 84R and 84L used for fouling testing, each of which is equipped with a krypton lamp as a light-emitting element.

[0038] (Fire detection unit) The fire detection units 60R and 60L each include sensor units 64, 68, and 72 and amplification processing units 66, 70, and 74, respectively. For example, in the right eye fire detection unit 60R, a right eye translucent window 50R provided in the sensor housing unit 46 is located in front of the sensor units 64, 68, and 72, and infrared energy from the external detection area is incident on the sensor units 64, 68, and 72 through the right eye translucent window 50R.

[0039] The right eye fire detection unit 60R monitors fires, for example, by observing flames using a three-wavelength method. The sensor unit 64 selects and transmits (passes through) infrared radiation in the 4.5 μm band, which is the resonant emission band of CO2 specific to flames, from the infrared energy incident through the right eye translucent window 50R, using an optical wavelength bandpass filter. The infrared radiation is received by a light receiving sensor and converted into photoelectric energy. The amplification processing unit 66 then performs predetermined processing, such as amplification, and outputs the flame reception signal E1R corresponding to the amount of received light energy to the detector control unit 54.

[0040] The sensor unit 68 selects and transmits (passes through) 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 light-transmitting window 50R using an optical wavelength bandpass filter. This light is then received by a light receiving sensor, converted into photoelectric energy, and then amplified and processed by the amplification processing unit 70 to output a first non-flame light receiving signal E2R corresponding to the amount of light received to the detector control unit 54.

[0041] The sensor unit 72 selects and transmits (passes through) infrared energy in the second non-flame wavelength band, for example the 2.3 μm band, from the infrared energy incident through the right eye light-transmitting window 50R using an optical wavelength bandpass filter. This light is then received by a light receiving sensor, converted into photoelectric energy, and then amplified and processed by the amplification processing unit 74 to output a second non-flame light receiving signal E3R corresponding to the amount of received light energy to the detector control unit 54.

[0042] The amplification processing units 66, 70, and 74 are equipped with a preamplifier, a frequency filter that selectively passes a predetermined frequency band including the flame flicker frequency, and a main amplifier, among others.

[0043] The detector control unit 54 determines (detects) a fire using a known method 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.

[0044] Furthermore, when the detector control unit 54 receives a self-addressed test instruction signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it sequentially drives the external test light sources 84R and 84L to emit light, and for example, by comparing the level of the flame reception signal E1R at this time with the level of the flame reception signal E1R obtained in the same manner when the unit was shipped from the factory in an uncontaminated state, it evaluates the degree of contamination of the translucent window 50R and performs a contamination test to detect contamination defects (abnormalities in which infrared transmission performance decreases due to contamination). In addition, when the detector control unit 54 sequentially drives the internal test light sources 78R, 80R, and 82R to emit light, and for example, by comparing the level of the flame reception signal E1R at this time with the level of the flame reception signal E1R obtained in the same manner when the unit was shipped from the factory, it evaluates the sensitivity of the right eye fire detection unit 60R and performs a sensitivity test to detect sensitivity defects (abnormalities in which sensitivity is outside the appropriate range, such as decreased sensitivity due to sensor failure).

[0045] Furthermore, the internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R and internal test light sources 78L, 80L, 82L may each be shared by a single light source. The same applies to the left eye fire detection unit 60L. The same can be done for the first non-flame receiving signals E2R, E2L and the second non-flame receiving signals E3R, E3L.

[0046] [Disaster Prevention Receiving Panel] (Outline of the disaster prevention receiver panel) Figure 5 is a block diagram showing the schematic configuration of the disaster prevention receiving panel. As shown in Figure 5, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 is equipped with a panel control unit 34, which is composed of a computer circuit equipped with a CPU, memory, various input / output ports, etc., and is provided with functions such as a fire monitoring control unit 45, a fault prediction judgment unit 46, and a fault prediction judgment condition change unit 47, which are realized by the execution of a program.

[0047] Transmission units 36a and 36b are provided for the control panel 34, and multiple fire detectors 12 installed in the up-line tunnel 1a and the down-line tunnel 1b are connected to signal lines 14 drawn out from the transmission units 36a and 36b.

[0048] Furthermore, the control panel 34 is connected to an alarm unit 38 equipped with a speaker and an alarm indicator light, a display unit 40 equipped with a liquid crystal display and a printer, an operation unit 41 equipped with various switches, and a modem 42 for connecting the IG slave station equipment 20. In addition, an I / O unit 43 is provided to which 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 are connected.

[0049] If the fire monitoring and control unit 45 determines that there is a fire based on the reception of a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it performs predetermined fire processing, including outputting a fire alarm (notification) by the alarm unit 38, interlocking control of other equipment via the I / O unit 43, such as displaying a no-entry alarm by the alarm display panel equipment 24, and transmitting a fire alarm to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0050] (Fault prediction unit) The fault prediction unit 46 sets predetermined fault prediction conditions and performs control to determine that there is a fault in the fire detector 12 based on the received light signal (or corresponding received light signal information) when the test light source of the fire detector 12 is driven, if the predetermined fault prediction conditions are met.

[0051] For example, the fault prediction unit 46 determines that a fault is imminent when the level of the light received signal from a sensitivity test that tests its own internal normality, which is performed periodically, such as once a day, is neither normal nor faulty based on a predetermined standard value. It then performs control to determine that a fire detector is faulty when the number of times such fault predictions have been made reaches a predetermined fault prediction threshold number.

[0052] Figure 6 is an explanatory diagram showing the setting of fault prediction judgment conditions and the fault prediction judgment operation based on the received signal level during sensitivity testing.

[0053] To simplify the explanation, the following description will focus on the case where, based on the level of the flame light-receiving signal E1R during sensitivity testing, a malfunction in the right-eye fire detection unit 60R is judged and the malfunction judgment conditions are changed. However, similarly, the first non-flame light-receiving signals E2R, E2L and the second non-flame light-receiving signals E3R, E3L can also be judged based on these signals, and a malfunction judgment can be made for each of these signals, i.e., for each signal system of the sensor section (sensor section 64, 68, 72) of the fire detection units 60R, 60L (i.e., for each signal system including the amplification processing unit 66, 70, 74), and the malfunction judgment conditions can be changed accordingly.

[0054] As shown in Figure 6(A), the fault prediction unit 46 initially registers the peak level of the light-receiving signal (flame light-receiving signal E1R) detected in the sensitivity test of the fire detector 12 in its factory default state as a reference value (reference level) 96 as a fault prediction condition. It sets a predetermined normal range 98 that includes the reference value 96, a predetermined fault threshold 102 that is below the normal range 98, a fault range 104 that is less than or equal to the fault threshold 102, and sets the area between the normal range 98 and the fault range 104 as the fault prediction range 100. Note that the fault threshold 102 may be set as a fixed value and the fault range 104 as a fixed range, or the fault range 104 may also be changed according to the reference value 96.

[0055] Here, the normal range 98 of the received light signal is defined as the range enclosed by, for example, an upper limit 98a and a lower limit 98b, centered around the reference value 96, and is set to, for example, ±10 percent of the reference value 96. The failure threshold 102 is set to, for example, a value of about 50 percent of the reference value 96.

[0056] Furthermore, for the fault prediction range 100, for example, a range from (upper limit 98a) to {(reference value 96) + (50 percent of reference value 96)} may be added. Similarly, for the fault range 104, for example, a range greater than or equal to {(reference value 96) + (50 percent of reference value)} may be added.

[0057] Based on the setting of failure prediction judgment conditions using the normal range 98, failure range 104, and failure prediction range 100 based on such a reference value 96, as illustrated by the black circles in Figure 6(A), for example, if the peak level of the received light signal (flame received light signal E1R) detected by a test conducted once a day is plotted, the failure prediction judgment unit 46 determines that a failure is likely if the peak level at the time of the test is neither in the normal range 98 nor the failure range 104, i.e., if it is in the failure prediction range 100.

[0058] Next, as shown in Figure 6(B), the fault prediction unit 46 counts the number of fault prediction judgments N and compares it with a predetermined fault prediction judgment threshold number Nth. When the number of judgments N reaches the fault prediction judgment threshold number Nth, it determines that the fault prediction judgment conditions have been met and that a fault has occurred. In other words, the fault prediction unit 46 determines a fault based on the received light signal during the test, and on the fact that the peak level of the received light signal is neither in the normal range 98 nor the fault range 104, and combines these with the number of judgments N.

[0059] Here, the counting of the number of judgments may be performed, for example, over a predetermined period (for example, a predetermined number of times for a regularly conducted test), and the count may be reset and restarted after this period has elapsed, or other appropriate counting methods may be adopted.

[0060] (Fault prediction judgment condition change section) The fault prediction judgment condition modification unit 47 generates test result information based on the peak level of the received light signal obtained from the test, and controls the fault prediction judgment conditions to change based on the test result information. In this case, the fault prediction judgment condition modification unit 47 changes the fault prediction judgment conditions, for example, the reference value 96 shown in Figure 6(A), based on the trend of the peak level of the received light signal obtained from the test result information, and changes the normal range 98, fault range 104, and fault prediction range 100 in accordance with the change in the reference value 96.

[0061] Figure 7 is an explanatory diagram illustrating the operation of the failure prediction judgment condition change unit, showing, for example, a case where a test is conducted once a day and the timing of changing the failure prediction judgment condition is set to every 10 days. The failure threshold 102 is fixed.

[0062] If we assume that the timing for changing the fault prediction criteria is reached on day D1, which is 10 days after the period T1 from day D0, then the peak levels of the light received during the test, indicated by the black dots, have been obtained for 10 tests during period T1. Here, during period T1, a normal range 98-1 and a fault prediction range 100-1 are set based on the reference value 96-1 at that time. Of these, 7 times are in the normal range 98-1, 2 times are in the fault prediction range 100-1, and the remaining 1 time is at point a, which is above the normal range 98-1.

[0063] Here, we explain the case where the peak level at point a is excluded from the calculation of the initial value as an outlier level caused by transient ambient light, external electrical noise or vibration, induced lightning, etc. Furthermore, peak levels that fall below the fault threshold 102, as shown at point b during period T2, are also excluded from the calculation of the reference value 96-2 as outlier levels. Of course, these outlier levels may also be included in the calculation, or, for example, whether to include or exclude them may be selected based on their frequency of occurrence.

[0064] Based on the peak levels of the light-receiving signals during the test held during this period T1, the fault prediction judgment condition modification unit 47 excludes the peak level at point a from the calculation of the initial value and obtains a new reference value 96-2 by averaging the nine peak levels in the normal range 98-1 and the fault prediction range 100-1. In this case, the peak levels become the light-receiving signal information, and the averaging result becomes the test result information.

[0065] Next, the fault prediction condition change unit 47 obtains a new reference value 96-2 from the peak level of the received light signal during period T1, sets this as the reference value 96-2 for the next period T2, sets the normal range 98-2 based on the new reference value 96-2, and as a result, sets the fault prediction range 100-2.

[0066] As a result, the reference value 96-2, normal range 98-2, and fault prediction range 100-2 are changed to shift to the lower level side in accordance with the decreasing trend of the peak level of the light received signal during the test period T1, thereby changing the fault prediction judgment conditions. Similarly, if the peak level of the light received signal during the test is increasing, the reference value 96-2, normal range 98-2, and fault prediction range 100-2 are changed to shift to the higher level side accordingly.

[0067] Similarly, the failure prediction judgment condition changing unit 47 changes the failure prediction judgment conditions according to the trend of the peak level of the light received signal during the test by obtaining new reference values ​​96-3, 96-4, ... and changing the normal range 98-3, 98-4, ... and the failure prediction range 100-3, 100-4, ... each time it reaches the timing for changing the failure prediction judgment conditions.

[0068] Therefore, even if the level of the received light signal during testing fluctuates due to seasonal factors, for example, the fault prediction judgment conditions are changed to follow these fluctuations, making it possible to appropriately judge fault signs from the level of the received light signal during testing throughout the year. In this way, if a fault sign is judged to be present under appropriate conditions, it will be clear that the reliability of the fire detector 12 has decreased. As a result, the operations manager can take appropriate action, for example, by focusing inspections on the fire detector that has been judged to be showing signs of failure, and it will be possible to prevent the tunnel from being closed due to false fire alarms and the resulting tunnel entry prohibition alarms, etc., more reliably than before.

[0069] Here, the timing of changing the fault prediction judgment conditions by the fault prediction judgment condition changing unit 47 is not limited to a fixed period of time, but may be done each time a predetermined number of tests are counted, including when the tests are not conducted regularly, or when a fault prediction is detected in a particular fire detector, or it may be done at any time at the administrator's discretion via the operation unit 41, and any method may be used as appropriate.

[0070] Furthermore, the fault prediction judgment condition modification unit 47 modifies the fault prediction judgment conditions based on the peak level of the light received signal during the test as test result information. However, the test result information may be the average value of the peak level of the light received during the test, which has been statistically processed, and the fault prediction judgment conditions may be modified based on this.

[0071] Furthermore, the received light signal level during testing may be stored on an annual basis, and if the fault prediction judgment conditions are to be changed on a monthly basis, for example, the received light level during testing in the same month of the previous year may be read out and the fault prediction judgment conditions may be changed based on this. Alternatively, the fault prediction judgment conditions that have been changed on a monthly basis may be stored, and if the fault prediction judgment conditions are to be changed on a monthly basis, for example, the fault prediction judgment conditions for the same month of the previous year may be read out and changed. In addition, as a fault prediction judgment condition, the number of fault prediction judgment threshold counts Nth may be changed instead of, or in addition to, changing the fault prediction range.

[0072] [System configuration of the fault prediction judgment unit and the fault prediction judgment condition change unit] In the above embodiment, the functions of the fault prediction judgment unit 46 and the fault prediction judgment condition change unit 47 are located in the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, but the system is not limited to this, and they may be located at any location in the system.

[0073] For example, the functions of the fault prediction judgment unit 46 and the fault prediction judgment condition change unit 47 may be placed in the fire detector 12. In this case, the fire detector 12 receives an instruction to change the fault prediction judgment conditions from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, or changes the fault prediction judgment conditions based on its own test result information at a timing controlled by the fire detector 12.

[0074] In addition to issuing instructions from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to the fire detectors 12 to change the fault prediction judgment conditions at predetermined intervals, the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 may also acquire test result information from multiple fire detectors 12 and process it comprehensively. For example, the test result information may be processed comprehensively by dividing it into sections such as tunnels and signal systems, and instructions to change the fault prediction judgment conditions may be issued for sections and signal systems where the level fluctuation of the received light signal during testing is large.

[0075] Alternatively, the fault prediction unit 46 may be placed on the fire detector 12, and the fault prediction condition change unit 47 may be placed on the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and the units may be distributed throughout the system in any way that is appropriate.

[0076] [Modified version of the present invention] (Fire detector) The above embodiment uses a three-wavelength fire detector as an example, but other methods may also be used. For example, a two-wavelength flame detector may be used that detects infrared energy in the 4.5 μm band, which is the resonant emission band of CO2, and in the shorter wavelength band, for example, around 5.0 μm, and determines the presence or absence of a flame based on the relative ratio of the received signals in these two wavelength bands.

[0077] (Monitoring system) The above embodiment uses an R-type tunnel disaster prevention system, which monitors for fires, an abnormality within the tunnel, as an example of a monitoring system, but a P-type (Proprietary-type) system may also be used.

[0078] Furthermore, the present invention can be applied to monitoring systems other than tunnel disaster prevention systems. For example, it can be applied to appropriate monitoring systems such as automatic fire alarm systems that monitor fires inside buildings, or disaster prevention systems that monitor fires in plants, etc. Also, the abnormal events to be monitored are not limited to fires; they may also include various disaster events, and may be used in security monitoring systems consisting of security detectors with functions such as human body detection and intrusion detection, and security receiving panels.

[0079] (others) Furthermore, the present invention includes appropriate modifications that do not impair its purpose and advantages, and is not limited by the numerical values ​​shown in the above embodiments. [Explanation of Symbols]

[0080] 1a: Upbound tunnel 1b: Downbound tunnel 10: Disaster Prevention Receiving Panel 12: Fire detector 14: 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: Television surveillance equipment 30: Lighting equipment 32: Remote monitoring and control equipment 34: Control Panel 36a, 36b: Transmission section 45: Fire Monitoring and Control Unit 46: Fault Prediction Unit 47: Fault prediction judgment condition change unit 50R,50L: Translucent window 52R, 52L: Translucent windows for test light sources 54: Detector Control Unit 56: Transmission section 58: Power supply section 60R, 60L: Fire detection unit 64, 68, 72: Sensor section 66, 70, 74: Amplification Processing Unit 76: Test light emission drive unit 78R, 78L, 80R, 80L, 82R, 82L: Internal test light source 84R, 84L: External test light source

Claims

1. A monitoring system that connects a detector to a receiving panel to monitor for abnormalities, A fault prediction unit determines a fault when the received light signal obtained from the light received by the sensor part of the detector during a test in which the test light source of the detector is driven satisfies predetermined fault prediction conditions, A fault prediction judgment condition changing unit that changes the predetermined fault prediction judgment conditions based on the test result information of the received light signal obtained by the above test, Equipped with, As predetermined fault prediction conditions, a normal range of the level of the received light signal that is judged to be normal for the detector, a fault range of the level of the received light signal that is judged to be faulty for the detector, targeting levels of the received light signal lower than the lower limit of the normal range, and a fault prediction range of the level of the received light signal that is judged to be a fault indicator between the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the fault range are set. The failure prediction judgment condition changing unit is characterized in that, when changing the failure prediction range as a predetermined failure prediction judgment condition, it changes the normal range and the failure prediction range by changing the upper and lower limits of the normal range without changing the failure range.

2. A monitoring system according to claim 1, The failure prediction judgment condition changing unit is characterized in that it acquires a reference value for the level of the received light signal based on the level of the received light signal within the normal range or the failure prediction range obtained by the test during a predetermined period as test result information, sets a new upper and lower limit of the normal range based on the reference value, and sets a new failure prediction range between the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the failure range.

3. The monitoring system according to Claim 2, As the predetermined fault prediction criteria, a second fault range is set, which targets the level of the received light signal that is higher than the upper limit of the normal range, and a second fault prediction range is set between the upper limit of the normal range and the lower limit of the second fault range. The monitoring system is characterized in that the fault prediction condition changing unit further sets a new lower limit of the second fault range based on the reference value, and sets a new second fault prediction range between the upper limit of the normal range and the lower limit of the second fault range.

4. A detector that tests its own normality by driving a test light source, A fault prediction unit determines a fault when the received signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit during the aforementioned test satisfies predetermined fault prediction conditions, A fault prediction judgment condition changing unit that changes the predetermined fault prediction judgment conditions based on the test result information of the received light signal obtained by the above test, Equipped with, As predetermined fault prediction conditions, a normal range of the level of the received light signal that is judged to be normal for the detector, a fault range of the level of the received light signal that is judged to be faulty for the detector, targeting levels of the received light signal lower than the lower limit of the normal range, and a fault prediction range of the level of the received light signal that is judged to be a fault indicator between the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the fault range are set. The detector is characterized in that, when the fault prediction judgment condition changing unit changes the fault prediction range as a predetermined fault prediction judgment condition, it changes the normal range and the fault prediction range by changing the upper and lower limits of the normal range without changing the fault range.

5. A detector according to claim 4, The detector is characterized in that the fault prediction judgment condition changing unit acquires a reference value for the level of the received light signal based on the level of the received light signal within the normal range or the fault prediction range obtained by the test during a predetermined period as test result information, sets a new upper and lower limit of the normal range based on the reference value, and sets a new fault prediction range between the lower limit of the normal range and the upper limit of the fault range.

6. The detector according to claim 5, As the predetermined fault prediction criteria, a second fault range is set, which targets the level of the received light signal that is higher than the upper limit of the normal range, and a second fault prediction range is set between the upper limit of the normal range and the lower limit of the second fault range. The detector is characterized in that the fault prediction judgment condition changing unit further sets a new lower limit of the second fault range based on the reference value, and sets a new second fault prediction range between the upper limit of the normal range and the lower limit of the second fault range.

Images