Tunnel disaster prevention system and disaster prevention receiving panel

Abstract

To provide a tunnel disaster prevention system that can efficiently and appropriately detect deterioration by determining a reliability of a fire detector, and thus, can suppress a false fire alarm.SOLUTION: A tunnel disaster prevention system comprises: a fire detector 12 that determines a fire based on a determination result of a fire determination which is performed when a flame receiving optical signal obtained from a flame-specific featured wavelength band contained in the received light is equal to or greater than a predetermined value; and a disaster prevention receiving board 10 to which the fire detector 12 is connected, wherein: if the fire determination does not determine that there is a fire, then the fire detector 12 does not determine that there is the fire, but determines that there is a failure sign of the fire detector 12, and counts the number of times that the failure sign has been determined to be a failure sign; and the disaster prevention receiving board 10 acquires the failure sign information including the occurrence frequency of the failure sign counted by the fire detector 12 from the fire detector 12, and determines a reliability of the fire detector 12 based on the occurrence frequency of the failure sign contained in the acquired failure sign information.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 8

Description

Technical Field

[0006]

[0001] The present invention relates to a tunnel disaster prevention system for monitoring a fire in a monitoring area by a fire detector connected to a signal line drawn out from a disaster prevention receiver, and to a disaster prevention receiver included in the tunnel disaster prevention system.

Background Art

[0002] Conventionally, in tunnels such as motorways, fire detectors for monitoring fires are installed to protect people and vehicles from fire accidents occurring inside the tunnel, and are connected to signal lines drawn out from a disaster prevention receiver to monitor fires.

[0003] The fire detector has detection areas in both the left and right directions, and is arranged continuously at intervals of, for example, 25 m or 50 m along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel so that the detection areas of adjacent fire detectors overlap complementarily.

[0004] In addition, the fire detector monitors radiation from a fire flame occurring inside 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.

[0005] However, in such a conventional fire detector, when the operation period becomes long and the deterioration of the fire detector progresses, even in a state where it is considered to be operating normally without detecting a sensor failure due to a sensitivity test or a dirt abnormality due to a dirt test, there is a possibility that a situation may occur where the fire detector outputs a fire detection signal and a non-fire alarm is issued from the disaster prevention receiver. In such a case, until it is confirmed that it is a non-fire alarm, an entry prohibition alarm is issued by an alarm display board facility or the like to prohibit vehicles from passing through the tunnel, and it is necessary for the person in charge of management to go to the site for confirmation, which takes time and effort until the tunnel passage is resumed and has a significant impact such as causing traffic congestion.

[0006] 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.

[0007] 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]

[0008] [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 [Overview of the project] [Problems that the invention aims to solve]

[0009] Incidentally, some conventional tunnel fire prevention systems determine the degree of deterioration based on abnormal test results of fire detectors. However, in this case, abnormal test results can occur during testing due to disturbances that are present constantly or for a specified period of time in certain locations, such as permanent lighting installations, vehicle traffic, temporary construction lighting installations or welding light associated with construction work in the surrounding area, dust generation, and worker traffic (for example, disturbance light may affect the test light, preventing proper test results). In such cases, the fire detector may be judged as deteriorated even though it is not. Therefore, there is a need to determine the degree of deterioration of fire detectors by considering temporal, local, and overall environmental factors.

[0010] The present invention aims to provide a tunnel disaster prevention system and a disaster prevention receiving panel for the tunnel disaster prevention system that can efficiently and appropriately detect deterioration by determining the reliability of fire detectors, thereby suppressing false fire alarms. [Means for solving the problem]

[0011] (Tunnel disaster prevention system 1) The present invention is a tunnel disaster prevention system, A fire detector that determines a fire based on the result of a fire determination performed when the flame reception signal obtained from light in a characteristic wavelength band specific to flames (for example, infrared light in the 4.5 μm band specific to flames) contained in the received light is above a predetermined value, A fire alarm receiver panel connected to a fire detector, Equipped with, If the fire detector does not determine that there is a fire, it will determine that a malfunction has occurred in the fire detector and count the number of times that malfunction has occurred. The fire safety receiving panel is characterized by acquiring fault prediction information from the fire detector, including the number of times a fault prediction has occurred as counted by the fire detector, and determining the reliability of the fire detector based on the number of times a fault prediction has occurred included in the acquired fault prediction information.

[0012] (Multiple fire detection criteria) Fire detection by fire detectors has multiple fire detection conditions. A fire detector will not detect a fire if at least some of the multiple fire detection conditions are not met.

[0013] (Fire detection based on flame and non-flame detection signals) Fire detection by a fire detector includes fire detection based on fire detection conditions derived from a flame detection signal and a non-flame detection signal obtained from light in a wavelength band different from the characteristic wavelength band contained in the detected light (for example, infrared light in the 2.3 or 5.0 μm band).

[0014] (Fire detection based on the frequency of the flame light reception signal) Fire detection by fire detectors includes fire detection using fire detection conditions based on the frequency of the flame light signal.

[0015] (Tunnel disaster prevention system 2) In another embodiment of the present invention, a tunnel disaster prevention system, A fire detector that uses the received value of the received light signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit to determine an abnormality in the fire detector that affects the received value, A fire alarm receiver panel connected to a fire detector, Equipped with, Fire detectors are If a predetermined value (e.g., detection sensitivity coefficient or attenuation rate) obtained using the received light value satisfies the predetermined abnormality judgment conditions, it is determined that there is an abnormality in the fire detector that affects the received light value (e.g., sensitivity abnormality or contamination abnormality). If a predetermined value obtained using the received light value satisfies a predetermined abnormality prediction criterion that is stricter than the predetermined abnormality judgment criterion, it is determined to be an abnormality prediction of the fire detector that affects the received light value (for example, an abnormality in sensitivity or an abnormality in contamination). When a fire detector is judged to have an abnormality, this abnormality is treated as a malfunction of the fire detector, and the number of times this abnormality is judged is counted as the number of malfunction occurrences. The disaster prevention receiving panel is characterized by acquiring failure omen information including the number of occurrences of failure omens counted by a fire detector from the fire detector, and determining the reliability of the fire detector based on the number of occurrences of failure omens included in the acquired failure omen information.

[0016] (Failure signal) When the fire detector determines an abnormality in the fire detector, it transmits an abnormality signal (for example, a sensitivity abnormality signal or a contamination signal) to the disaster prevention receiving panel.

[0017] (Failure omen signal) When the fire detector determines a failure omen when the number of occurrences of the failure omen satisfies a predetermined condition, it transmits a failure omen signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel.

[0018] (Reset of the counted number of occurrences of failure omens) The counting of the number of occurrences of failure omens by the fire detector is reset when a predetermined period has elapsed since the number of occurrences of the failure omen was counted.

[0019] (Disaster prevention receiving panel) In another form of the present invention, there is a disaster prevention receiving panel for a tunnel, A fire detector that counts the number of occurrences of failure omens used for determining its own failure omen when a predetermined condition is satisfied is connected, The disaster prevention receiving panel is characterized by acquiring failure omen information including the number of occurrences of failure omens counted by the fire detector from the fire detector, and determining the reliability of the fire detector based on the number of occurrences of failure omens included in the acquired failure omen information.

Advantages of the Invention

[0020] (Basic advantages) The present invention relates to a fire prevention system in which a monitoring area is divided into multiple sections, and a predetermined number of fire detectors are installed in each section. The reliability of each section is determined by comparing section reliability information regarding predetermined failure indicators of the fire detectors installed in that section with comprehensive failure indicator information regarding predetermined failure indicators of fire detectors installed in each section of a predetermined system that covers multiple sections including that section. By comparing section reliability information based on information regarding failure indicators in fire detectors with comprehensive failure indicator information, it is possible to identify sections where the reliability has decreased due to deterioration of fire detectors, etc. The system manager can then focus on inspecting the fire detectors installed in the sections where reliability has decreased, and replace them with new ones if necessary. This enables appropriate measures to be taken regarding fire detectors in sections that are likely to emit false fire alarm signals due to deterioration, etc.

[0021] Furthermore, for sections where reliability has been deemed to have decreased, environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, dust, electrical noise, and ambient light that can cause deterioration of fire detectors can be investigated, and measures can be taken to suppress or eliminate environmental factors that cause a decrease in reliability due to deterioration, etc.

[0022] (Effectiveness of assessing the reliability of fire detectors) Furthermore, since the reliability of a fire detector is determined by comparing its own predetermined failure indicator information with the section reliability information of the section to which it belongs, it is possible to identify the fire detector that has been deemed unreliable among the multiple fire detectors installed in the section where reliability has been deemed to have decreased, to inspect that fire detector intensively, replace it with a new one if necessary, and take measures such as investigating the environmental factors of the installation location and suppressing or eliminating environmental factors that cause reliability to decrease.

[0023] (The effectiveness of countermeasures taken when a decrease in the reliability of a fire detector is not detected during a period of reduced reliability) Furthermore, if a fire detector installed in a section deemed to have reduced reliability is not found to have reduced reliability, it is assumed that there are factors that impede reliability in the section where reduced reliability was determined. Therefore, even if reduced reliability is determined for a section, if no reduction in reliability is determined for a specific fire detector installed in that section, it is assumed that the overall number of failures and deteriorations of fire detectors installed in that section is high, which means that the number of failure precursors due to environmental factors in that section is higher than in other sections. In this case, the system investigates environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, dust, electrical noise, and ambient light that cause deterioration of fire detectors, and notifies the system of countermeasures to suppress or eliminate environmental factors that cause reduced reliability due to deterioration, thereby eliminating or suppressing environmental factors that impair reliability and reducing the number of failures and deteriorations.

[0024] (Effectiveness of countermeasure 1 when the reliability of fire detectors is judged to be reduced) Furthermore, if a fire detector installed in a section deemed to have reduced reliability is found to have reduced reliability, the system will now determine that factors impeding reliability exist in the surrounding environment of that fire detector. This allows the system administrator to identify one or more fire detectors that have been deemed to have reduced reliability from among the multiple fire detectors installed in the section deemed to have reduced reliability. By focusing inspections on the fire detectors deemed to have reduced reliability and replacing them with new ones if necessary, the system administrator can prevent further deterioration of reliability or restore reliability. [Brief explanation of the drawing]

[0025] [Figure 1] Diagram illustrating the overview of the tunnel disaster prevention system. [Figure 2] Diagram showing the fire detector's section and detection area. [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] A flowchart illustrating the control operation of a fire detector. [Figure 6] This diagram illustrates the peak level of the received light signal and the number of occurrences of malfunction indicators when the internal test light source is driven during a sensitivity test of a fire detector. [Figure 7] A flowchart illustrating the sensitivity test of a fire detector, including the assessment of malfunction signs. [Figure 8] Block diagram showing the general functional configuration of the disaster prevention receiver panel. [Figure 9] A flowchart illustrating reliability judgment control by the disaster prevention receiver panel. [Modes for carrying out the invention]

[0026] [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 according to this embodiment is that fire detectors 12 are connected to signal lines 14a and 14b wired from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 to each signal system within the tunnel. The fire detectors 12 hold failure prediction information indicating the number of occurrences of predetermined failure predictions due to deterioration, etc. The disaster prevention receiving panel 10 acquires failure prediction information from the fire detectors 12 at a predetermined reliability judgment control timing, extracts and collects the number of occurrences of failure predictions, generates section reliability information including the section average number of occurrences of predetermined failure predictions by averaging the number of occurrences of predetermined failure predictions from fire detectors installed in each section when the tunnel is divided into multiple sections, and generates overall failure prediction information including the overall average number of occurrences of failure predictions for the entire tunnel by averaging the section average number of occurrences of failure predictions for each section in multiple sections, and when a specific section that satisfies predetermined conditions when comparing the section average number of occurrences of failure predictions and the overall average number of occurrences of failure predictions is compared is judged to be a section with reduced reliability and notified.

[0027] Therefore, if the average number of malfunction indicators for a section of fire detectors 12 exceeds a predetermined value compared to the overall average number of malfunction indicators for all fire detectors 12 in the tunnel, that section is judged to have reduced reliability and a notification is issued. This identifies the section of the tunnel where the reliability has decreased due to deterioration of the fire detectors 12, allowing the operator to focus on inspecting the fire detectors 12 installed in the section judged to have reduced reliability and, if necessary, replace them with new ones. This enables appropriate measures to be taken for fire detectors 12 in sections where deterioration has progressed and there is a high possibility of outputting false fire signals (fire signals for non-fires), thereby preventing situations where tunnel traffic is stopped due to fire treatment accompanied by a tunnel entry prohibition alarm caused by a false fire alarm.

[0028] Furthermore, with respect to the fire detectors 12 in sections where reliability has been deemed to have decreased, measures can be taken such as investigating environmental factors that cause deterioration of the fire detectors 12, such as temperature, humidity, dust, electrical noise, and ambient light, and repairing or replacing fire detectors that are expected to fail due to deterioration, or suppressing or eliminating environmental factors in sections that cause a decrease in reliability. Specifically, this could include removing or relocating ambient light sources, adjusting ventilation flow to control temperature and humidity, or restricting the passage of workers involved in construction or inspections of surrounding equipment.

[0029] The disaster prevention receiving panel 10 also detects and notifies fire detectors 12 whose failure prediction frequency is equal to or exceeds a predetermined value relative to the average number of failure prediction occurrences in the section, classifying them as reliability-decreased detectors. By identifying the fire detector 12 that has been judged to have decreased reliability among multiple fire detectors 12 installed in the section where reliability has been judged to have decreased, it becomes possible to focus inspections on that fire detector 12, repair or replace the fire detector if necessary, and take measures such as investigating environmental factors at the installation location and suppressing or eliminating environmental factors that cause a decrease in reliability.

[0030] In this embodiment, a failure indicator refers to a state that predicts a failure that is likely to occur in the future, and can also be described as a sign of failure, a precursor to failure, or a warning sign of failure.

[0031] Furthermore, while the example in Figure 1 shows a one-to-one correspondence between the signaling system and the tunnel, it is possible to have multiple signaling systems in a single tunnel, for example. Alternatively, multiple tunnels can be combined into a single signaling system; the relationship between the signaling system and the tunnel is arbitrary.

[0032] [Overview of the Tunnel Disaster Prevention System] As shown in Figure 1, an uphill tunnel 1a and a downhill tunnel 1b are constructed as tunnels for an expressway. Inside the uphill tunnel 1a and the downhill tunnel 1b, fire detectors 12 are installed along the longitudinal walls of the tunnels at intervals of, for example, 25 meters or 50 meters. The present invention can also be applied to disaster prevention systems in tunnels other than expressways.

[0033] In this embodiment, as shown in Figure 2(A), for example, the uphill tunnel 1a is divided into multiple sections A1 to An, and in this example, each section contains three fire detectors 12. The division into sections A1 to An is arbitrary, and it is sufficient that each section contains at least one fire detector 12. The lengths of sections A1 to An may be the same or different, and are arbitrary. The same applies to the number of fire detectors 12 installed in each section.

[0034] The fire detector 12 is equipped with two sets of fire detection units, a right eye and a left eye, and as shown in Figure 2, it has detection areas 15 in both the uphill and downhill directions along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel. The fire detectors 12 and detection areas 15 are arranged continuously along the longitudinal direction of the tunnel, with adjacent units such as the right eye 13R and left eye 13L overlapping in a complementary manner. The detectors monitor and detect fires by observing infrared radiation from flames caused by fires occurring within the detection areas 15.

[0035] Furthermore, the inbound tunnel 1a and the outbound tunnel 1b are equipped with emergency facilities, including manual reporting devices and emergency telephones for reporting fires, fire hydrants for extinguishing fires and preventing their spread, and water spray equipment that sprays fire-fighting water from spray heads to protect the tunnel structure and ducts from fire, but these are not shown in the diagram.

[0036] From the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, power signal lines and signal lines 14a and 14b are drawn out to the inbound tunnel 1a and the outbound tunnel 1b, and multiple fire detectors 12 are connected to each of them, with each fire detector 12 having a unique address. In the following explanation, signal lines 14a and 14b may be referred to as signal line 14 when there is no need to distinguish between them.

[0037] 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 transmission method.

[0038] 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 facility located externally, via a network.

[0039] The ventilation system 22 is a system that generates ventilation flow in the longitudinal direction of the tunnel by operating a jet fan installed on the ceiling side of the tunnel.

[0040] The warning display board equipment 24 is a system that displays information such as entry prohibition warnings due to fire on an electronic display board to inform users. The radio rebroadcasting equipment 26 is a system that allows drivers and others to receive information from road administrators inside the tunnel. The television monitoring equipment 28 is a system that allows for confirmation of the scale and location of fires, operation of water spray equipment, and understanding the situation inside the tunnel when guiding evacuations. The lighting equipment 30 is a system that drives and manages the lighting equipment inside the tunnel.

[0041] [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 an overview of the functional configuration of the fire detector.

[0042] As shown in Figure 3, the fire detector 12 has two sets of translucent windows 50R and 50L, arranged on the left and right sides of a sensor housing 53 located at the top of the housing 51, with a sensor unit 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.

[0043] 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.

[0044] (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.

[0045] 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.

[0046] 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.

[0047] 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.

[0048] The test light emission drive unit 76 is connected to internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L used for sensitivity testing, and to external test light sources 84R and 84L used for contamination testing, each of which is equipped with a krypton lamp as a light-emitting element.

[0049] (Fire detection unit) The fire detection units 60R and 60L include sensor units 64, 68, and 72 and amplification processing units 66, 70, and 74. For example, in the right eye fire detection unit 60R, a right eye translucent window 50R provided in the sensor housing unit 53 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.

[0050] The right eye fire detection unit 60R monitors for fires, for example, by a three-wavelength flame detection system. 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 light receiving sensor receives this infrared radiation, converts it into photoelectric energy, and then the amplification processing unit 66 performs predetermined processing such as amplification to output it to the detector control unit 54 as a flame reception signal E1R corresponding to the amount of received light energy.

[0051] 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.

[0052] The sensor unit 72 selects and transmits (passes through) infrared energy in the second non-flame wavelength band, for example 2.3 μm, 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.

[0053] 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.

[0054] (Fire judgment) The detector control unit 54 is equipped with a fire determination unit 86, which is a function realized by the execution of a program. The fire determination unit 86 determines whether a fire has occurred based on a flame light receiving signal E1R, a first non-flame light receiving signal E2R, and a second non-flame light receiving signal E3R, using multiple fire determination stages. The fire determination unit 86 performs, for example, the following three stages of fire determination.

[0055] If the flame light reception signal E1R is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, the fire determination unit 86 calculates the relative ratio (E1R / E2R) with the first non-flame light reception signal E2R. If the relative ratio (E1R / E2R) exceeds a predetermined threshold, the unit determines that the first stage fire determination condition has been met and determines that there is a fire (candidate fire), and proceeds to the next second stage fire determination.

[0056] The second stage of fire determination by the fire determination unit 86 involves calculating the relative ratio (E1R / E3R) of the flame light receiving signal E1R with the second non-flame light receiving signal E3R. If the relative ratio (E1R / E3R) exceeds a predetermined threshold, the second stage of fire determination conditions is met, and a fire is determined.

[0057] Next, the fire determination unit 86 performs the third stage of fire determination. The third stage of fire determination by the fire determination unit 86 involves performing a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) on the flame reception signal E1R and analyzing the results to calculate, for example, the relative ratio of the relative intensity of the low-frequency component below 4 Hz to the relative intensity of the high-frequency component between 4 Hz and 8 Hz. If this relative ratio is above or above a predetermined threshold, the third stage of fire determination is met, and a fire is determined. As a result, a fire has been determined in all three stages of fire determination, and the system as a whole is initially judged to be a fire.

[0058] Furthermore, if the fire determination conditions of the first to third stages are met consecutively a predetermined number of times, the system determines that a fire has occurred, as the predetermined fire determination accumulation conditions have been met, and performs control to transmit a fire signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10. The same procedure is performed in the left eye fire detection unit 60L.

[0059] Furthermore, the fire determination by the fire determination unit 86 using multiple fire determination stages is not limited to the above-described fire determination. One or more additional fire determination stages may be added, or, for example, one of the above three stages may be omitted, resulting in two stages. Alternatively, for example, four stages including the accumulation determination stage may be used.

[0060] (Determination of signs of failure) The fire detection unit 86 determines that a fire has occurred if it fails to determine that a fire has occurred during the three stages of fire detection described above, and performs control to count the number of times the fire indicator has occurred N using a counter.

[0061] Furthermore, when the number of occurrences N of a malfunction indicator satisfies a predetermined malfunction indicator judgment accumulation condition, for example, when the number of occurrences N of a malfunction indicator reaches a predetermined threshold Nth, the fire detection unit 86 determines (confirms) it to be a malfunction indicator, transmits a malfunction indicator signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and then performs predetermined malfunction indicator processing. In addition, the fire detection unit 86 may also perform predetermined malfunction indicator processing when the number of confirmed malfunction indicators reaches a predetermined number.

[0062] The predetermined fault prediction processing performed by the fire detection unit 86 includes, for example, processing to stop the transmission of fire signals, and processing to increase the threshold for the number of accumulated fire detections to make the fire detection accumulation conditions stricter. The fault prediction processing to stop the transmission of fire signals is intended to suppress the occurrence of false fire alarms because even if a fire is detected after a fault prediction, there is a high possibility that the fire detection will be incorrect due to a fault. It is also possible to choose not to perform the processing to stop the transmission of fire signals.

[0063] Furthermore, when the fire detection unit 86 receives an internal status request command signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it performs control to generate and transmit fault prediction information indicating the number of fault prediction occurrences N obtained at that time. The disaster prevention receiving panel 10 evaluates the reliability of the fire detector 12 based on the number of fault prediction occurrences N extracted from the acquired fault prediction information and uses it to determine whether the device is reliable or unreliable. In addition, the degree of unreliability may be divided into multiple stages, for example, to distinguish between a state of unreliable and a state of no reliability.

[0064] The number of occurrences of a potential failure, N, counted by the counter, is reset at predetermined intervals, or when a predetermined period has elapsed since the first occurrence of a potential failure. However, the number of occurrences of a potential failure before the reset, N, may be stored as potential failure information.

[0065] (Sensitivity test) The detector control unit 54 is equipped with a sensitivity test unit 88, which is a function realized by program execution. The sensitivity test unit 88 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 internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L to perform 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.

[0066] 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 drive unit 76 drives the internal test light source 78R to emit light, causing flame-like light (infrared light simulating a flame) equivalent to a fire flame to be incident on the sensor unit 64.

[0067] For the circuit blocks of the sensor unit 64 and the amplification processing unit 66, the reference light reception value from the initial sensitivity test at the time of factory shipment is stored in memory, and the detected light reception value obtained in the sensitivity test at system startup is approximately the same as 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 progresses, the detected light reception value gradually decreases, and the detection sensitivity coefficient decreases to 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, and so on.

[0068] If the detection sensitivity coefficient falls to 1 or less, the sensitivity test unit 88 calculates a correction coefficient which is the reciprocal of the detection sensitivity coefficient and stores it in memory. It then multiplies the detected light value in subsequent operating conditions by the correction coefficient to perform sensitivity correction, and the fire determination unit 86 determines that there is a fire based on the sensitivity-corrected light value.

[0069] Furthermore, the sensitivity test unit 88 has a preset sensitivity correction limit threshold, for example, a sensitivity correction limit threshold of 0.5, which corresponds to the correction coefficient that is the limit of sensitivity correction. If the sensitivity coefficient obtained in the sensitivity test is less than or equal to the sensitivity correction limit threshold, or falls below the sensitivity correction limit threshold, the unit determines that there is a sensitivity abnormality in the sensor unit 64 and instructs the transmission unit 56 to set information indicating a sensitivity abnormality in the response signal to the call signal matching its own address and transmit a sensitivity abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10.

[0070] Furthermore, the sensitivity test unit 88 has a preset sensitivity coefficient that indicates a precursor to a sensitivity anomaly before reaching the sensitivity correction limit, for example, a sensitivity anomaly precursor threshold of 0.6. If the detection sensitivity coefficient obtained in the sensitivity test is less than or equal to the sensitivity anomaly precursor threshold, or falls below the precursor threshold, it is determined to be a precursor to a sensitivity anomaly state in which sensitivity correction is likely to become impossible in the near future. The unit then instructs the transmission unit 56 to transmit a sensitivity anomaly precursor signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 for notification.

[0071] Furthermore, if the sensitivity test unit 88 detects an indication of a sensitivity abnormality, this may be considered one of the malfunction indicators, and the fire detection unit 86 may perform a counting operation using its counter to increase the number of malfunction indicator occurrences N.

[0072] Similarly, if the detection sensitivity increases to 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., as the operational period progresses, it will be corrected in the same manner, and if it reaches the limit, it will be considered an anomaly.

[0073] 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 are similarly subjected to sensitivity testing. In addition, the left eye fire detection unit 60L is also subjected to sensitivity testing in the same manner by driving the internal test light sources 78L, 80L, and 82L to emit light using the test light emission drive unit 76.

[0074] (Stain test) The detector control unit 54 is equipped with a dirt test unit 90, which is a function realized by the execution of a program. Similar to 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 and 84L to perform a dirt test on the translucent windows 50R and 50L.

[0075] For example, in the case of a fouling test of the translucent window 50R, the test light emission drive unit 76 drives the external test light source 84R to emit light, causing a flame-like light equivalent to a fire flame to be incident on the sensor unit 64 through the translucent window 52R and the translucent window 50R for the test light source. The translucent window 52R and the translucent window 50R for the test light source are free of fouling at the time of factory shipment, and the light received value obtained in the fouling test at that time is stored in memory as a reference light received value and is used in the calculation of the light attenuation rate.

[0076] The detected light-receiving values ​​obtained in the dirt test during system startup are approximately the same as the reference light-receiving values, and the attenuation rate obtained by subtracting the detected light-receiving value from the reference light-receiving value and dividing by the reference light-receiving value is 0. As the operating period progresses, dirt accumulates on the translucent window 50R, and the attenuation rate gradually increases to 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, and so on.

[0077] If the light attenuation rate increases in this way, the fouling test unit 90 determines the light attenuation rate through a fouling test and stores a correction value that is the reciprocal of (1 - light attenuation rate) in memory. The unit then performs fouling correction by dividing the detected light value (the light value corrected by the correction value from the sensitivity test) detected in subsequent operating conditions by the correction value, and the fire detection unit 86 determines a fire based on the fouling-corrected light value.

[0078] Furthermore, the dirt test unit 90 has a dirt threshold, for example, a dirt threshold of 0.5, which is the light reduction rate corresponding to the limit of dirt correction. If the light reduction rate obtained in the sensitivity test is equal to or greater than the dirt threshold, or exceeds the dirt threshold, it is determined that there is a dirt abnormality that makes it impossible to correct the dirt on the light-transmitting window 50R. The unit then instructs the transmission unit 56 to set the dirt abnormality information in the response signal to the call signal that matches its own address and transmits the dirt signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 for notification.

[0079] Furthermore, the soiling test unit 90 has a pre-set soiling prediction threshold, for example, a soiling prediction threshold of 0.6, which corresponds to a light reduction rate that is indicative of a stage where soiling correction is about to reach its limit. If the light reduction rate obtained in the soiling test is equal to or greater than the soiling prediction threshold, or exceeds the soiling prediction threshold, it is determined that there is a high probability that soiling correction of the translucent window 50R will become impossible in the near future, and the transmission unit 56 is instructed to transmit a soiling prediction signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 for notification.

[0080] Furthermore, if a contamination indicator is detected in the contamination test unit 90, this may be considered one of the malfunction indicators, and the fire detection unit 86 may perform a counting operation using its counter to increase the number of malfunction indicator occurrences N.

[0081] (Control operation of fire detector) Figure 5 is a flowchart showing the control operation of the fire detector, which is the control operation by the fire detection unit 86 shown in Figure 4.

[0082] As shown in Figure 5, the fire determination unit 86, for example, taking the fire detection unit 60R in Figure 4 as an example, in step S1, takes in the flame light reception signal E1R, the first non-flame light reception signal E2R, and the second non-flame light reception signal E3R output from the amplification processing units 66, 70, and 74 by AD conversion. In step S2, if the flame light reception signal E1R is greater than or equal to a predetermined value, proceed to step S3, where the ratio of the flame light reception signal E1R to the first non-flame light reception signal E2R (E1R / E2R) is calculated. If it is greater than or equal to the predetermined value, the first stage fire determination condition is met, and proceed to step S4. In step S4, the ratio of the flame light reception signal E1R to the second non-flame light reception signal E3R (E1R / E3R) is calculated. If it is greater than or equal to the predetermined value, the second stage fire determination condition is met, and proceed to step S5.

[0083] Next, in step S5, the fire determination unit 86 performs a fast Fourier transform (FFT operation) on the flame light reception signal E1R. In step S6, if the relative intensity ratio of the components on the low-frequency side (4 Hz or less) and the high-frequency side (over 4 Hz and up to 8 Hz) is greater than or equal to a predetermined value, the unit determines that the third-stage fire determination condition is satisfied and proceeds to step S7. There, it determines whether the first to third-stage fire determination conditions from steps S1 to S6 have been met consecutively for a predetermined number of accumulation thresholds.

[0084] Next, in step S7, the fire detection unit 86 satisfies the predetermined accumulation threshold as a fire detection accumulation condition, proceeds to step S8, determines that there is a fire, and transmits a fire signal to the fire prevention receiving panel 10 to perform fire processing. Subsequently, in step S9, when it determines that it has received a fire recovery signal (recovery instruction signal) from the fire prevention receiving panel 10, it restores the fire detection to its initial state in step S10 and returns to step S1.

[0085] On the other hand, if the first stage fire determination conditions are not met in step S3, the fire determination unit 86 determines that a malfunction has occurred and proceeds to step S11, incrementing the counter N which counts the number of malfunctions. In step S12, if the number of malfunctions N is less than a predetermined threshold number Nth, the process from step S1 is repeated.

[0086] Furthermore, if the fire determination unit 86 finds that the first stage fire determination condition in step S3 is satisfied, but the second stage fire determination condition in step S4 is not satisfied, it proceeds to step S11 and increments the counter N, which counts the number of occurrences of malfunction precursors, by 1. In step S12, if the number of occurrences of malfunction precursors N is less than a predetermined threshold number Nth, it repeats the process from step S1.

[0087] Furthermore, if the fire determination unit 86 finds that the fire determination conditions for the first stage of step S3 and the second stage of step S4 are satisfied, but the fire determination conditions for the third stage of step S6 are not satisfied, it proceeds to step S11 and increments the counter N, which counts the number of occurrences of the malfunction precursor, by 1. In step S12, if the number of occurrences of the malfunction precursor N is less than a predetermined threshold number Nth, it repeats the process from step S1.

[0088] By repeatedly counting the number of occurrences of such fault indicators, the fire detection unit 86 determines (confirms) a fault indicator when the number of occurrences N of fault indicators in step S12 is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold number Nth, thus fulfilling the fault indicator determination accumulation condition. It then proceeds to step S13, where it transmits a fault indicator signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 for notification, and subsequently performs predetermined fault indicator processing in step S14.

[0089] In step S13, the failure prediction judgment accumulation condition of step S12 may be further modified by adding a failure prediction judgment accumulation condition determination, which determines whether the number of failure prediction judgments made in step S12 has reached a predetermined threshold number.

[0090] Furthermore, the fault prediction process, for example, increases the accumulation threshold in step S7 to tighten the fire detection accumulation conditions. Also, the fire detector 12 stops at least the transmission of the fire signal in step S8, compared to the monitoring operation in steps S1 to S7.

[0091] Furthermore, if the relative ratio in step S3 is less than a predetermined value, the process may return to step S1. Alternatively, if it is determined in step S7 that the fire judgment accumulation conditions are not met, the process may proceed to step S11.

[0092] Furthermore, when the fire detection unit 86 receives an internal status request command from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 during control operation, it responds by sending information (indicating N) regarding the number of occurrences of the fault indicator that is currently being counted by the counter, as fault indicator information, which the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 uses to determine the reliability of the fire detector 12.

[0093] (Determination of fault indicators based on sensitivity testing) Figure 6 is an explanatory diagram showing the peak level of the received light signal and the number of occurrences of malfunction indicators when the internal test light source was driven during a sensitivity test of the fire detector.

[0094] The sensitivity test unit 88, located in the detector control unit 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. It instructs the test light emission drive unit 76 to perform a light emission drive, causing the internal test light sources 78R, 80R, 82R, 78L, 80L, and 82L to flash sequentially at, for example, 2Hz for a predetermined period (for example, 1 second), thereby injecting flame-like light (test light) equivalent to a fire flame into the fire detection units 60R and 60L to perform a sensitivity test.

[0095] The sensitivity test performed by the sensitivity test unit 88 is the same as described in Figure 4. In addition, the sensitivity test unit 88 of this embodiment detects the peak level of each light-receiving signal for each of the flame light-receiving signal E1R, the first non-flame light-receiving signal E2R and the second non-flame light-receiving signal E3R output from the fire detection unit 60R during the sensitivity test, and the flame light-receiving signal E1L, the first non-flame light-receiving signal E2L and the second non-flame light-receiving signal E3L output from the fire detection unit 60L during the sensitivity test. As shown by the black circles in Figure 6(A), for example, if the peak level detected once a day falls outside the predetermined normal range 94 based on the initial value 92 of the peak level detected in the factory-shipped, undegraded state, but does not meet the failure judgment conditions, i.e., if it is within the failure prediction range 98, it is judged as a failure prediction, and as shown in Figure 6(B), control is performed to count the number of times the failure prediction occurs N using a counter.

[0096] Here, the normal range 94 of the received light signal is defined as the range enclosed by, for example, an upper limit 94a and a lower limit 94b, centered around the initial value 92, and is set to, for example, ±10 percent of the initial value 92. The failure threshold 96 is set to, for example, a value of about 50 percent of the initial value 92.

[0097] Furthermore, the fault prediction range is, for example, the range from the upper limit of the normal range 94, 94a, to the initial value 92 plus 50 percent of the initial value 92, i.e. (Upper limit 94a) and less than or equal to {(initial value 92) + (50 percent of initial value 92)} You may also consider adding a range to determine if it is a sign of a malfunction.

[0098] Meanwhile, the fire detection unit 86 compares the number of occurrences N of a potential failure, which is calculated by the counter of the sensitivity test unit 88, with a predetermined threshold number Nth set as a condition for accumulating potential failure detection. When the number of occurrences N of a potential failure is equal to or greater than the predetermined threshold Nth, or when the condition for accumulating potential failure detection is met by exceeding the predetermined threshold Nth, it determines (confirms) that a potential failure has occurred, transmits a potential failure signal to the fire prevention receiving panel 10, and subsequently performs a predetermined potential failure processing. The potential failure processing by the fire detection unit 86 may, for example, involve stopping the transmission of a fire signal.

[0099] Furthermore, when the fire determination unit 86 receives an internal status request command signal from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it performs control to transmit predictive fault information that includes information indicating the number of occurrences N of the predictive fault signs obtained at that time. The disaster prevention receiving panel 10 extracts the number of occurrences N of the predictive fault signs and uses this to evaluate the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal, and to determine whether it is reliable or has deteriorated.

[0100] The number of occurrences of a potential failure, N, counted by the counter, is reset, for example, at predetermined intervals, or when a predetermined period has elapsed since the first occurrence of a potential failure. The number of occurrences of a potential failure before the reset, N, may be stored as a history of potential failure information.

[0101] (Fire detector sensitivity test operation) Figure 7 is a flowchart showing a sensitivity test of a fire detector that includes fault prediction, and represents the control operation by the sensitivity test unit 88 and fire judgment unit 86 of the fire detector 12 shown in Figure 4.

[0102] As shown in Figure 7, the sensitivity test unit 88, taking the fire detection unit 60R in Figure 4 as an example, determines the reception of a test instruction signal (indicating its own address) transmitted once a day by sequentially specifying addresses from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S21, and proceeds to step S22, instructing the test light emission drive unit 76 to drive the internal test light source 78R to blink at 2Hz for a predetermined period (for example, 1 second) to inject a flame-like simulated light (test light) corresponding to a fire flame into the sensor unit 64.

[0103] Next, the sensitivity test unit 88 proceeds to step S23, where it detects the peak level of the flame light reception signal (received signal) E1R generated by the test light output from the amplification processing unit 66. In step S24, it determines whether or not the signal falls within the normal range 94 shown in Figure 6(A). If it falls within the normal range 94, it proceeds to step S25, where it calculates the detection sensitivity coefficient by dividing the peak level of the received signal, for example, by the initial value (reference light reception value) 92 stored during the initial sensitivity test at the time of factory shipment. In step S27, it calculates and stores the correction coefficient of the received signal as the reciprocal of the detection sensitivity coefficient, and uses it to correct the received signal level.

[0104] Next, the sensitivity test unit 88 proceeds to step S27, and repeats the process from step S21 until the detection sensitivity coefficient calculated in step S25 reaches a predetermined sensitivity correction limit threshold (for example, 0.5). The correction limit in step S25 may be the same as in step S31, where the peak level is below or equal to the failure threshold.

[0105] If the sensitivity test unit 88 determines in step S27 that the detection sensitivity coefficient has reached the sensitivity correction limit threshold, it repeats the process from step S21 in step S28 until a predetermined sensitivity abnormality determination accumulation condition is reached, for example, a predetermined accumulation count threshold. When the sensitivity abnormality determination accumulation condition in step S28 is satisfied, it transmits a sensitivity abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S29.

[0106] Next, the fire detection unit 86 receives a sensitivity abnormality determination from the sensitivity test unit 88 and performs a predetermined sensitivity abnormality processing in step S30. This sensitivity abnormality processing is performed because, after detecting a sensitivity abnormality, there is a high possibility that an incorrect fire detection will be made due to a sensitivity abnormality (for example, a failure of a light-receiving element or an electrical circuit failure accompanied by a sensitivity abnormality). For example, this involves increasing the accumulation count threshold for setting the fire detection accumulation conditions in the fire detection unit 86 to substantially lower the fire sensitivity, or stopping the transmission of a fire signal.

[0107] On the other hand, if the sensitivity test unit 88 determines in step S24 that the peak level of the received light signal E1R during the test is outside the normal range 94, it proceeds to step S31. If the peak level is below the fault threshold 96 or does not fall below the fault threshold, that is, if it is within the fault prediction range 98 shown in Figure 5(A), it determines that a fault prediction has occurred and notifies the fire detection unit 86. Note that the fault prediction determination in step S31 is not limited to the peak level of the received light signal, but may also be based on, for example, the integral value or the average level.

[0108] Next, the fire detection unit 86, having received notification of the fault prediction result from the sensitivity test unit 88, increments the counter N, which counts the number of times a fault prediction has occurred, in step S32. In step S33, if the number of times a fault prediction has occurred N is less than or equal to the threshold number Nth set as a predetermined fault prediction judgment accumulation condition, the process from step S21 is repeated.

[0109] By repeatedly counting the number of occurrences N of such fault indicators, the fire detection unit 86 determines (confirms) a fault indicator when the number of occurrences N of fault indicators in step S33 exceeds a predetermined threshold number Nth and the fault indicator determination accumulation condition is met, proceeds to step S35 to transmit a fault indicator signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 for notification, and then performs predetermined fault indicator processing in step S36.

[0110] This fault prediction process, for example, increases the accumulation threshold set as the fire judgment accumulation condition by the fire judgment unit 86, thereby tightening the fire judgment accumulation condition and effectively lowering the fire sensitivity. Furthermore, even if the fire judgment unit 86 subsequently determines that there is a fire, the transmission of the fire signal may be stopped because there is a high possibility that it is an erroneous fire judgment due to a fault, thereby suppressing the occurrence of false fire alarms.

[0111] Furthermore, when the fire detection unit 86 receives an internal status request command from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, it sends a response containing fault prediction information that includes information indicating the number of times N fault predictions have occurred, which is currently being counted by the counter. The disaster prevention receiving panel 10 then extracts the number of fault predictions from the acquired fire detector 12 fault prediction information, evaluates its reliability, and determines whether it is reliable or has decreased reliability.

[0112] Meanwhile, if the sensitivity test unit 88 determines in step S31 that the peak level of the received light signal has fallen to or below the fault threshold 96, it proceeds to step S28 and repeats the process from step S21 until it reaches a predetermined threshold for the number of accumulations set as the sensitivity abnormality determination accumulation condition. When the sensitivity abnormality determination accumulation condition in step S28 is satisfied, it transmits a sensitivity abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in step S29, and then performs predetermined sensitivity abnormality processing in step S30.

[0113] Furthermore, while this embodiment uses the example of determining the number of occurrences of malfunction indicators by performing sensitivity tests periodically on the fire detector, it is not limited to this. It also includes tests that can be performed at any time by test instruction operations from the disaster prevention receiving panel 10, and also includes appropriate tests that drive internal test light sources other than sensitivity tests. The same can be done for the left eye fire detection unit 60L. The same can also be done for the first non-flame receiving signals E2R, E2L and the second non-flame receiving signals E3R, E3L during testing.

[0114] [Determination of malfunction signs by the fire detection unit and sensitivity testing unit] In another embodiment of the fire detector 12 according to the present invention, the determination of a malfunction by the fire judgment unit 86 shown in the flowchart of Figure 5 and the determination of a malfunction by the sensitivity test unit 88 shown in the flowchart of Figure 7 are combined, and the number of occurrences N of the malfunctions determined by each is accumulated and counted. The fire alarm receiving panel 10 acquires malfunction information, including information indicating the cumulative number of malfunctions, from the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal, and evaluates the reliability from the extracted cumulative number of malfunctions to determine whether the device is reliable or has decreased reliability.

[0115] Furthermore, in the fault prediction system, when the cumulative number of fault prediction occurrences reaches a predetermined threshold number Nth or more and the fault prediction determination accumulation condition is met, a fault prediction is determined, a fault prediction signal is sent to the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 for notification, and then predetermined fault prediction processing is performed.

[0116] [Disaster Prevention Receiving Panel] (Outline of the disaster prevention receiver panel) Figure 8 is a block diagram showing the schematic configuration of the disaster prevention receiver panel. As shown in Figure 8, the disaster prevention receiver panel 10 is equipped with a fire monitoring control unit 42. The fire monitoring control unit 42 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.

[0117] Transmission units 35a and 35b are provided for the fire monitoring and control unit 42, and multiple fire detectors 12 installed in the up-line tunnel 1a and down-line tunnel 1b are connected to signal lines 14a and 14b drawn out from the transmission units 35a and 35b.

[0118] Furthermore, the fire monitoring and control unit 42 is equipped with an alarm unit 36 ​​with a speaker and an alarm indicator light, a display unit 37 with a liquid crystal display and a printer, an operation unit 38 with various switches, and a modem 39 for connecting the IG slave station equipment 20. In addition, an I / O unit 40 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.

[0119] The fire monitoring control unit 42 instructs the transmission units 35a and 35b to repeatedly send call signals via signal lines 14a and 14b, which include polling commands that sequentially specify the addresses of the fire detectors 12. When the fire detector 12 receives a call signal that matches its own address, it replies with response signals such as a fire signal, a sensitivity abnormality warning signal, a sensitivity abnormality signal, a contamination warning signal, and a contamination signal.

[0120] Furthermore, if the fire monitoring and control unit 42 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 by the alarm unit 36, interlocking control of other equipment via the I / O unit 40, 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.

[0121] Furthermore, the fire monitoring control unit 42 transmits test instruction signals that sequentially specify the addresses of the fire detectors 12 at system startup or at predetermined intervals during operation (for example, once a day, every 24 hours), causing the fire detectors 12 to perform sensitivity tests and contamination tests, and to respond with the results of each test. For example, if it receives a response signal indicating a sensor failure, it controls the alarm unit 36 ​​to sound an alarm, the display unit 37 to display a sensor failure alarm that identifies the address of the fire detector 12, and prints the alarm.

[0122] Furthermore, when the fire monitoring control unit 42 receives a response signal indicating a contamination abnormality obtained from the contamination test of the fire detector 12, it controls the alarm unit 36 ​​to sound an alarm, the display unit 37 to display a notification, and prints a contamination alarm that identifies the address of the fire detector.

[0123] Furthermore, when the fire monitoring control unit 42 receives a response signal indicating sensor failure or contamination abnormality obtained from the sensitivity test and contamination test of the fire detector 12, it transmits a relay signal from the modem 39 to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 via the IG slave station equipment 20 shown in Figure 1, and performs control to notify a failure alarm or abnormality alarm.

[0124] (Reliability Judgment Control) The control unit 34 in the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 is equipped with the functions of a section reliability information generation unit 44, an overall reliability information generation unit 46, a section reliability determination unit 48, and a fire detector reliability determination unit 50 in order to control the reliability determination of the fire detectors 12 installed in the tunnel.

[0125] When the section reliability information generation unit 44 determines that a reliability judgment timing has been reached at a predetermined interval, for example, once a week, it sends an internal state request command signal that sequentially specifies the addresses of the fire detectors 12, collects fault prediction information including information indicating the number of times N fault predictions have occurred held by the fire detectors 12 at that time, and performs control to generate section reliability information for each section A1 to An shown in Figure 2(A), which indicates the section average number of fault prediction occurrences by averaging the number of fault prediction occurrences of, for example, three fire detectors 12 installed in each section A1 to An.

[0126] The comprehensive reliability information generation unit 46 controls the generation of comprehensive failure prediction information, which is calculated by averaging the average number of failure prediction occurrences for each section A1 to An obtained from the section reliability information for sections A1 to An generated by the section reliability information generation unit 44, and representing the overall average number of failure prediction occurrences for the entire tunnel (for example, 14 signal lines). Alternatively, the comprehensive reliability information generation unit 46 may calculate the overall average number of occurrences by averaging the number of failure prediction occurrences for all fire detectors 12 collected for a predetermined signal system.

[0127] Furthermore, the section reliability determination unit 48 compares the average number of fault prediction occurrences in a section generated by the section reliability information generation unit 44 with the overall average number of fault prediction occurrences generated by the overall reliability information generation unit 46. It determines that a specific section that satisfies predetermined conditions, for example, a section with an average number of fault prediction occurrences in a section that is greater than or equal to a predetermined value or more than a predetermined value than the overall average number of fault prediction occurrences, is a section with reduced reliability and performs control to notify the system accordingly.

[0128] Furthermore, the fire detector reliability determination unit 50 targets fire detectors 12 in sections where the section reliability determination unit 48 has determined that reliability has decreased. If the number of occurrences of failure precursors in a section is equal to or exceeds a predetermined value relative to the average number of occurrences of failure precursors in that section, the unit determines that the fire detector 12 is a reliability-decreased detector and performs control to notify the user accordingly.

[0129] If the fire detector reliability determination unit 50 does not determine that the reliability of the fire detector 12 has deteriorated (i.e., there are no fire detectors 12 that have deteriorated), the section reliability determination unit 48 notifies, for example via the alarm unit 36, that there is a factor that impedes reliability in the section where the deterioration of reliability has been determined, and provides a predetermined course of action.

[0130] For example, the section reliability determination unit 48, for instance, via the alarm unit 36, prompts the confirmation of environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, dust, electrical noise, and ambient light as factors that impede the reliability of the section. It also provides guidance via the display unit 37, for example, indicating the need to investigate the cause by examining the section environment, and to perform inspections such as visual checks and operational tests of the fire detectors 12 installed in the section, as countermeasures.

[0131] Furthermore, if the fire detector reliability determination unit 50 determines that the reliability of a specific fire detector 12 in a section where reliability has been determined to be reduced, it will notify, for example via the alarm unit 36, that there may be factors in the surrounding environment of the fire detector 12 that impede its reliability and will prompt the user to take predetermined measures, including replacing the fire detector. For example, the fire detector reliability determination unit 50 will notify, via the alarm unit 36, of the possibility of environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, dust, electrical noise, and ambient light being present as installation environmental factors that impede the reliability of the fire detector 12, and will also provide guidance via the display unit 37 to prompt the user to take measures such as investigating the cause by examining the section environment, the need to inspect the fire detector 12 installed in the section, such as visual inspection and operational testing, and to replace the fire detector 12.

[0132] (Control operation for reliability judgment) Figure 9 is a flowchart illustrating the reliability judgment control by the disaster prevention receiver panel. It shows the control operation by the control unit 34 of the disaster prevention receiver panel 10, which is equipped with the functions of the section reliability information generation unit 44, the overall reliability information generation unit 46, the section reliability judgment unit 48, and the fire detector reliability judgment unit 50 shown in Figure 8. For simplicity, it is assumed that there is only one signal system.

[0133] As shown in Figure 9, in step S41, the control unit 34 of the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 determines that it has reached the timing for collecting reliability information, for example, once a week, and proceeds to step S42, where it sends an internal state request command signal that sequentially specifies the addresses of the fire detectors 12 in the signaling system, and obtains fault prediction information, which includes information indicating the number of times a fault prediction has occurred that the fire detector 12 is currently holding. In step S43, it generates overall reliability information that shows the overall average number of fault prediction occurrences by averaging the number of fault prediction occurrences of all fire detectors 12, and then in step S44, it generates section reliability information by averaging the number of fault prediction occurrences of the fire detectors 12 provided in each section to obtain the section average number of fault prediction occurrences. Alternatively, instead of steps S43 and S44, the section average number of fault prediction occurrences for each section may be calculated first, and then the overall average number of fault prediction occurrences may be calculated by averaging the section average number of fault prediction occurrences for all sections.

[0134] Next, in step 45, the control unit 34 compares the overall average number of occurrences of failure indicators with the section-average number of occurrences of failure indicators for each section. If it identifies a section where the section-average number of occurrences of failure indicators is greater than or equal to a predetermined value relative to the overall average number of occurrences of failure indicators, it proceeds to step S46 to determine the section with reduced reliability.

[0135] Next, the control unit 34 compares the average number of failure indicators in the section where reliability has been determined to be reduced with the number of failure indicators in each fire detector 12 installed in that section. If it identifies a fire detector 12 that has a failure indicator count equal to or greater than a predetermined value relative to the average number of failure indicators in that section, it proceeds to step S50, where it identifies the fire detector 12 with reduced reliability. In step S51, it notifies the fire detector 12, the section, and the action to be taken to address the reduced reliability. In step S52, it sets the fire detector 12 with reduced reliability as an address for the fire monitoring control unit 42, enabling fire control (fire processing corresponding to the reduced reliability of the fire detector) in response to the fire signal from the fire detector 12 with reduced reliability.

[0136] On the other hand, if the control unit 34 does not identify any fire detector 12 in step S47 that has a number of occurrences of fault precursors equal to or greater than a predetermined value relative to the average number of occurrences of fault precursors in that section, it proceeds to step S48, notifies the section in which reliability has been determined to be reduced, and then in step S49 notifies the action to be taken for the section in which reliability has been determined to be reduced.

[0137] Note that while Figure 9's reliability judgment control determines a decrease in reliability, the same applies when reliability is determined to be present.

[0138] (Fire treatment in accordance with reliability assessment) If the fire detector reliability determination unit 50, located in the control unit 34 of the disaster prevention receiving panel 10 in Figure 8, determines that a specific fire detector 12 in a section has decreased reliability, it sets the information of that fire detector 12 in the fire monitoring control unit 42. When the fire monitoring control unit 42 receives a fire signal from the fire detector 12, it performs fire processing according to whether the detector is reliable or unreliable.

[0139] The reliability evaluation of the fire detector 12 by the fire monitoring control unit 42 is as follows: for example, if the number of occurrences N of the fire detector 12's failure predictions, which are acquired and extracted as failure prediction information, is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold number Nref set as a reliability judgment storage condition, the reliability is judged to be good; if it is equal to or greater than the predetermined threshold number Nref, or exceeds the threshold number Nref, the reliability is judged to be poor.

[0140] If the fire detector 12 is to not transmit a fire signal when it detects a malfunction, for example, the threshold count Nref for setting the reliability judgment storage condition should be set to a value lower than the threshold count Nth set as the malfunction prediction judgment storage condition in the fire judgment unit 86 shown in Figure 4.

[0141] When the fire monitoring and control unit 42 determines that the fire detector 12 that transmitted 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 after that, it determines that there is a fire and performs predetermined fire processing, including outputting a fire alarm, controlling the interlocking of other equipment including displaying a no-entry alarm on at least the alarm display board equipment 24, and transmitting a fire transfer signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0142] On the other hand, when the fire monitoring control unit 42 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal has decreased, it transmits a command signal to change the storage conditions of the fire detector 12 (a command to tighten the storage conditions) to increase the storage count threshold for setting the first fire judgment storage conditions of the fire detector 12 (the storage conditions in step S7 of Figure 5), thereby changing to a stricter (more difficult to determine as a fire) second fire judgment storage condition. Specifically, for example, it increases the storage count threshold to effectively reduce sensitivity to fire, and then transmits a recovery command signal to restore it.

[0143] In this state, the fire monitoring control unit 42 determines that there is a fire when it receives a second fire signal from the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal with changed fire judgment storage conditions, due to the satisfaction of the second fire judgment storage conditions, and / or when it receives a fire signal from an adjacent fire detector 12 that is overlappingly monitoring the same detection area as the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal, and performs predetermined fire processing, including outputting a fire alarm, interlocking control of other equipment including displaying a no-entry alarm by at least the alarm display board equipment 24, and transmitting a fire transfer signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32.

[0144] In this way, if the fire monitoring control unit 42 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the fire signal has decreased, even if the fire detector 12 transmits a fire signal due to a malfunction indicator other than a fire, the fire judgment storage conditions of the fire detector are changed to be more stringent, making it less likely that it will transmit a fire signal again due to an unknown non-fire cause after recovery. Furthermore, at this time, the reliability of the adjacent fire detector 12 has not decreased, and the possibility of it transmitting 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 either or both of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal and recovered, and the adjacent fire detector 12, it is possible to reliably prevent the system from mistakenly determining that there is a fire and taking fire action when there is no fire.

[0145] Furthermore, if the fire monitoring control unit 42 determines that the reliability of the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal has decreased, and then determines that a fire has not been detected based on the fire detector 12 and / or adjacent fire detectors 12, it will perform control to send a non-fire signal to the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 to notify it, indicating that it has received a non-fire (incorrect) fire signal from the fire detector 12.

[0146] This allows the administrator on the remote monitoring and control equipment 32 to become aware of a decrease in the reliability of the fire detector 12, which could be the cause of a false fire alarm, and to use this information to improve the efficiency of tunnel operation management, such as by strengthening inspections of the fire detector 12.

[0147] Furthermore, if the fire monitoring control unit 42 determines that the reliability of a fire detector 12 that has transmitted a fire signal has decreased, it may send a storage condition change command signal (storage condition relaxation command) to an adjacent fire detector 12 that is overlapping in monitoring the detection area of ​​the said fire detector 12, thereby lowering the storage count threshold in step S7 of Figure 5, and changing the first fire judgment storage condition to a third fire judgment storage condition that relaxes the first fire judgment storage condition (making it easier to reach a fire judgment), thereby effectively increasing the sensitivity to fire.

[0148] Specifically, for example, by lowering the accumulation count threshold set as the first fire judgment accumulation condition for an adjacent fire detector 12 and changing it to a third fire judgment accumulation condition, if an actual fire occurs, a fire signal will be quickly transmitted from the adjacent fire detector 12, and / or, after the fire detector 12 that transmitted the first fire signal and was judged to have reduced reliability is restored, a fire can be dealt with quickly by transmitting a fire signal again.

[0149] Furthermore, if the fire detector 12 can transmit fire signals that distinguish between the right and left eyes, then, for example, the adjacent fire detector 12 can be one whose left eye is overlapping the detection area of ​​the right eye of the fire detector 12. If the right and left eyes cannot be distinguished, then either of the adjacent fire detectors 12 or any of the other two will be used.

[0150] [Modified version of the present invention] (Fire detector) While a three-wavelength fire detector is used as an example, other methods are also acceptable. For instance, a two-wavelength flame detector could detect infrared energy in the 4.5 μm band, which is the resonant emission band of CO2, and in a shorter wavelength band, such as around 5.0 μm, and determine the presence or absence of a flame based on the relative ratio of the received signals in these two wavelength bands.

[0151] (Changes to accumulation conditions) Furthermore, in the above embodiment, the fire detection storage conditions of the fire detector 12, for example, the storage count threshold, can be changed in two ways: either the fire detector 12 itself increases the storage count threshold to tighten the fault prediction judgment conditions (lower fire sensitivity) as a fault prediction process (step S14 in Figure 5), or the fire detection storage conditions are increased to tighten the fire detection storage conditions (relax sensitivity) in response to an instruction from the fire prevention receiving panel 10 when it determines that reliability has decreased (step S51 in Figure 8). If both are performed in overlapping cases, the storage time should be appropriately changed so that the overall storage time does not become unnecessarily long and fire detection is not delayed.

[0152] (Type P Tunnel Disaster Prevention System) The above embodiment shows a so-called R-type tunnel fire prevention system in which a fire detector with an address set is connected to a signal line drawn out from a fire prevention receiving panel to monitor for fires. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and the same applies to a so-called P-type tunnel fire prevention system in which a signal line is drawn out from the fire prevention receiving panel to each fire detector, and a fire detector is connected to each signal line.

[0153] In a typical P-type tunnel fire prevention system, it is not possible to communicate specific information such as the number of times a warning sign has occurred between the fire prevention receiving panel and the fire detector. Therefore, the fire prevention receiving panel shown in the above embodiment evaluates the reliability of the fire detector and determines whether it is reliable or has deteriorated. This function is provided on the fire detector side, and when the fire detector determines that its reliability has deteriorated, it transmits reliability information to the fire prevention receiving panel to notify it of the deterioration in reliability, for example, by disconnecting the signal line or by providing a dedicated line for reliability deterioration signals.

[0154] (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]

[0155] 1a: Upbound tunnel 1b: Downbound 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: Television surveillance equipment 30: Lighting equipment 32: Remote monitoring and control equipment 34: Control Panel 35a, 35b: Transmission section 42: Fire Monitoring and Control Unit 44: Section Reliability Information Generation Unit 46: Integrated Reliability Information Generation Department 48: Section Reliability Information Judgment Unit 50: Fire detector reliability information judgment 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 86:Fire Judgment Department 88: Sensitivity Test Section 90: Stain test section

Claims

1. A fire detector that determines a fire based on the result of a fire determination performed when the flame reception signal obtained from light in the characteristic wavelength band specific to flames contained in the received light is above a predetermined value, The fire alarm receiver panel to which the aforementioned fire detector is connected, Equipped with, If the fire detection does not determine that there is a fire, the fire detector will determine that a malfunction has occurred in the fire detector rather than determining that there is a fire, and will count the number of times the malfunction has occurred. The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the disaster prevention receiving panel acquires fault prediction information from the fire detector, including the number of times the fault prediction has occurred as counted by the fire detector, and determines the reliability of the fire detector based on the number of times the fault prediction has occurred included in the acquired fault prediction information.

2. A tunnel disaster prevention system according to claim 1, The fire detection by the aforementioned fire detector has multiple fire detection conditions, The aforementioned fire detector is characterized in that it does not determine that there is a fire if at least some of the multiple fire determination conditions are not met.

3. A tunnel disaster prevention system according to claim 1 or 2, The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the fire detection by the fire detector includes fire detection using fire detection conditions based on the flame detection signal and a non-flame detection signal obtained from light in a wavelength band different from the characteristic wavelength band contained in the detected light.

4. A tunnel disaster prevention system according to any one of claims 1 to 3, The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the fire detection by the fire detector includes fire detection using fire detection conditions based on the frequency of the flame light reception signal.

5. A fire detector that uses the received value of the received light signal obtained from the light received by the sensor unit to determine an abnormality in the fire detector that affects the received value, The fire alarm receiver panel to which the aforementioned fire detector is connected, Equipped with, The aforementioned fire detector is If a predetermined value obtained using the received light value satisfies the predetermined abnormality judgment conditions, it is determined that there is an abnormality in the fire detector that is affecting the received light value. If a predetermined value obtained using the received light value satisfies a predetermined abnormality prediction condition that is stricter than the predetermined abnormality judgment condition, it is determined to be an abnormality prediction of the fire detector that affects the received light value. When an abnormality is detected in the fire detector, the abnormality is considered to be a malfunction of the fire detector, and the number of times an abnormality is detected is counted as the number of malfunction occurrences. The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the disaster prevention receiving panel acquires fault prediction information from the fire detector, including the number of times the fault prediction has occurred as counted by the fire detector, and determines the reliability of the fire detector based on the number of times the fault prediction has occurred included in the acquired fault prediction information.

6. A tunnel disaster prevention system according to claim 5, The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the fire detector transmits an abnormality signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel when it determines that the fire detector is malfunctioning.

7. A tunnel disaster prevention system according to any one of claims 1 to 6, The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the fire detector transmits a malfunction warning signal to the disaster prevention receiving panel when the number of occurrences of the malfunction warning satisfies predetermined conditions and is determined to be a malfunction warning.

8. A tunnel disaster prevention system according to any one of claims 1 to 7, The tunnel disaster prevention system is characterized in that the count of the number of occurrences of the malfunction indicator by the fire detector is reset when a predetermined period of time has elapsed since the count of the number of occurrences of the malfunction indicator was started.

9. A fire detector is connected that counts the number of occurrences of a malfunction indicator, which is used to determine the presence of a malfunction indicator, when a predetermined condition is met. A fire prevention receiving panel for tunnels, characterized by acquiring fault prediction information from the fire detector, including the number of times the fault prediction has occurred as counted by the fire detector, and determining the reliability of the fire detector based on the number of times the fault prediction has occurred included in the acquired fault prediction information.

Images