Detector Anomaly Identification via Chamber Reading Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional fire and smoke detection systems face challenges in identifying if detector covers are left on after installation or maintenance, leading to potential failure in detecting real fires or smoke, which can cause safety hazards and is labor-intensive to verify across numerous devices.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that monitor detection chamber readings for anomalies caused by blockages, using light scattered by airborne particles, and execute alerts through a control panel, which includes identifying constant or varying readings within predetermined limits, and comparing them with past or proximate detector readings to determine if a detector is properly functioning.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If manual checking of each detector is performed to identify covered detectors, then detection accuracy is improved, but labor intensity and time consumption increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The detector automatically monitors its own detection chamber readings and compares them against expected ranges, enabling self-diagnosis of cap coverage status without requiring manual inspection. The system self-identifies when a detector is covered by analyzing anomalies in its own air particle detection data.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The control panel continuously receives detection chamber readings from all detectors and provides feedback by comparing actual readings against expected ranges. When anomalies are detected (indicating covered detectors), the system generates alerts to notify users, creating a closed-loop feedback mechanism that automatically identifies problematic detectors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If manual inspection of all detectors is performed to ensure proper functioning, then system reliability is improved, but productivity decreases due to labor-intensive tasks

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoidproductivity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

Each detector autonomously monitors its detection chamber readings and self-identifies when it is covered by analyzing anomalies in its air particle detection data. This self-service capability ensures system reliability without requiring manual inspection, thereby maintaining high productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical inspection with an automated electronic monitoring system. The control panel automatically collects, analyzes, and compares detection chamber readings from all detectors, substituting human labor with electronic automation to maintain reliability while improving productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Adaptability or versatility

If detectors are installed in hard-to-reach places such as above false ceilings or below false flooring, then installation flexibility is improved, but detectability of covered detectors worsens

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinstallation flexibilityVSAvoiddetectability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

Detectors installed in hard-to-reach places autonomously monitor their own detection chamber readings and self-identify when covered by analyzing anomalies in their air particle detection data. This eliminates the need for physical inspection, allowing detectors to be installed in flexible locations while maintaining detectability of their status.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The control panel receives continuous feedback from all detectors regardless of their physical location. By automatically comparing detection chamber readings against expected ranges, the system can identify covered detectors even when they are installed in inaccessible locations such as above false ceilings or below false flooring, where manual inspection would be difficult.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This solution effectively identifies and alerts users to detectors with potential blockages, reducing the risk of undetected fires or smoke and significantly reducing the time and effort required to verify the status of multiple detectors, enhancing safety and efficiency.

Implementation Method 1

the detection chamber readings comprise readings of light scattered by airborne particles when the airborne particles enter a detection chamber of the plurality of detectors, and in that the light scattered by airborne particles has been transmitted by a light transmitter and received by a photo electric receiver

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectLight scattering: Scattering

Data Source

PatentEP3839914B1Identification of an anomaly on a detector
Publication Date: 2024.07.31 CARRIER CORP
  • EP3839914B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3839914B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3839914B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

There is disclosed methods, systems and devices assisting detection of a cover/cap on a detector. The method includes monitoring (402) detection chamber readings from a plurality of detectors (104A, 104B, 104C, 104D, 104E, 104F) and identifying (404) an anomaly in the detection chamber readings. Further, the one or more detectors from the plurality of detectors with the anomalies are determined (406) from the detection chamber readings. An alert is executed (408) based on the anomaly in the detection chamber readings. For instance detection chamber readings remaining constant over time or inconsistent with those from neighboring detectors are indicative an of anomaly.