Test Method and Test System for Testing a System for Monitoring the Protection Readiness of a Fire Protection Installation

Abstract

The invention relates to a test method for testing a system for automated monitoring of a protection readiness of a fire protection system. The test method comprises the following steps: Receiving at least one test parameter of the system, evaluating the at least one test parameter on the basis of at least one specification for the at least one test parameter, and determining, on the basis of the evaluation, a quality indicator indicating the quality of the system's monitoring of the fire protection system.

Claims

1. Test method for testing a system for automated monitoring of a protection readiness of a fire protection system, comprising the following steps: receiving at least one test parameter of the system, evaluating the at least one test parameter on the basis of at least one specification for the at least one test parameter, and determining, on the basis of the evaluating, a quality indicator which indicates the quality of the monitoring of the fire protection system by the system.

2. The test method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one test parameter comprises a functional readiness indication, and wherein the evaluating comprises determining, on the basis of the functional readiness indication, that the system is configured to change the fire protection system from a testing state to an operating state in the event of a fire.

3. The test method according to claim 2, further comprising determining, on the basis of the functional readiness indication, that the changing to the operating state takes place within a time span, which is less than a predetermined threshold value, after the fire event has been registered.

4. The test method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one test parameter comprises a safety indication, and wherein the evaluation comprises determining, on the basis of the safety indication, that the system is configured to change the fire protection system from a testing state to an operational readiness state in case of a power failure.

5. The test method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one test parameter comprises a termination indication, and wherein the evaluation comprises determining, on the basis of the termination indication, that the system is configured to change the fire protection system from a testing state to an operational readiness state in the event of a test failure.

6. The test method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one test parameter comprises an evaluation result of an evaluation of at least one measured value of at least one measurement parameter which indicates the protection readiness of the fire protection system, wherein the evaluating of the at least one test parameter further comprises: determining all measurement parameters to be tested, and comparing whether the at least one test parameter comprises at least one evaluation result for each measurement parameter to be tested.

7. The test method according to claim 1, further comprising: providing a safeguarding of the at least one test parameter against modification by a user.

8. The test method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one test parameter comprises an identification of at least one component of a system for automated monitoring of the fire protection system, wherein the evaluating further comprises: verifying an approval of the at least one component of a system for automated monitoring of the fire protection system on the basis of the identification.

9. The test method according to claim 1, further comprising: testing of at least one test history, wherein the test history indicates the progression of the test parameter over time.

10. The test method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining a time interval for the monitoring of the protection readiness of the fire protection system by the system on the basis of the quality indicator.

11. A computer program with program code which cause a processor unit to carry out the method according to claim 1.

12. A test system for testing a system for automated monitoring of a protection readiness of a fire protection system, comprising: a receiving device configured to receive at least one test parameter of the system via a communication link, and a processor unit which is configured to evaluate the at least one test parameter on the basis of at least one specification for the at least one test parameter, and to determine, on the basis of the evaluating, a quality indicator indicating the quality of the monitoring of the fire protection system by the system.

13. The test system according to claim 12, wherein the at least one test parameter comprises: a functional readiness indication indicating a configuration of the system to change the fire protection system from a testing state to an operating state in the event of a fire; and/or a safety indication indicating a configuration of the system to change the fire protection system from a testing state to an operational readiness state in case of a power failure.

14. The test system according to claim 12, wherein the communication link comprises a secured connection.

15. The test system according to claim 12, wherein the communication link comprises a wireless communication link.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0081] The invention is described in more detail below with reference to the attached figures and using preferred embodiment examples. The figures show:

[0082] FIG. 1 a schematic representation of a system architecture according to the invention in a first embodiment, and

[0083] FIG. 2 a schematic flow chart of a test method for testing a system for the automated monitoring of a protection readiness of a fire protection system.

MODE(S) FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

[0084] FIG. 1 shows a system architecture comprising a test system 1, a system 2 for the automated monitoring of a protection readiness of a fire protection system 3 and a corresponding fire protection system 3.

[0085] The test system 1 comprises a processor unit 10 and a receiving device 11 and is also communicatively connected to a memory 12 and a display unit 13. In some embodiments the memory 12 and the display unit 13 may also be designed as parts of the test system 1.

[0086] The receiving device 11 is configured to communicate via a communication link 40 with a system 2 for the automated monitoring of a fire protection system 3, which is shown as a black box in FIG. 1. In the embodiment of FIG. 1 the communication link 40 is an encrypted communication link. This means that the test parameters transmitted via the communication link 40 are encrypted by the system 2 and decrypted by the test system 1. For this purpose, the test system 1 and the system 2 each preferably comprise a cryptographic device (not shown), which is designed as part of the receiving device 11 in the embodiment of FIG. 1.

[0087] The system 2 is also configured to communicate with a fire protection system 3. The fire protection system 3 comprises a first sensor 31, a second sensor 32 and a peripheral device 50, which is designed as a pump in the specific embodiment of FIG. 1. In the embodiment of FIG. 1 the fire protection system 3 is used for fire protection of a fire protection area comprising the high rack 60.

[0088] The system 2 is especially configured to communicate with the first sensor 31 and the second sensor 32 of the fire protection system via corresponding communication links. The first sensor 31 and the second sensor 32 are used for the acquisition of measurement parameters during a test run of the fire protection system 3 and/or of a peripheral device 50 contained therein. Therefore, it is preferable to arrange corresponding sensors 31, 32 on each peripheral device that must be tested regularly.

[0089] Based on the determination of the measurands during the test runs, the system 2 can automatically monitor the protection readiness of the fire protection system 3. However, to ensure that the system 2 is operating in conformity with the specifications, this system 2 must be tested by the test system 1.

[0090] The test by the test system 1 is preferably carried out at the time the system 2 is installed and can thus represent a one-time, initial certification. In addition, the test can also be repeated at regular intervals, for example, to verify the certification after a specified time.

[0091] In the specific embodiment of FIG. 1, the test system 1 performs an initial certification. For this purpose, the receiving device 11 of the test system 1 receives at least one time-stamped test parameter from the system 2. In the specific embodiment of FIG. 1, this test parameter comprises a functional readiness indication, which indicates that the system 2 is configured to change the fire protection system 3 from a testing state to an operating state in the event of a fire. Furthermore, the test parameter comprises a safety indication indicating that the system 2 is configured to change the fire protection system 3 from a testing state to an operational readiness state in case of a power failure. The test parameter according to the specific embodiment of FIG. 1 further includes a benchmark value indication indicating that the requirements of organizational fire protection applicable to the fire protection system are fulfilled. This benchmark value indication indicates in particular that the storage heights of the materials within the fire protection area specified for the fire protection system are below the specified limit values and that the fire protection system 3 can guarantee an adequate distribution of extinguishing fluid in the fire protection area. The test parameter is transmitted in encrypted form via the communication link 40. The receiving device 11 is configured to decode the test parameter.

[0092] In the specific embodiment of FIG. 1 the communication link 40 is provided in particular by a correspondingly certified data transmission device. The certified data transmission device and the receiving device 11 preferably further comprise appropriate access restriction devices, which, for example, require the entry of a password and/or have an appropriate firewall.

[0093] Subsequently, the receiving device 11 passes on the decoded test parameter to the processor unit 10. The processor unit 10 is configured to evaluate the test parameter. For this purpose, the processor unit 10 first checks the time stamp of the test parameter to determine whether it might have been modified.

[0094] If no change is detected, the processor unit 10 further determines, on the basis of the functional readiness indication, whether, in the event of a fire, the system 2 is configured to change the fire protection system 3 within a period of less than 30 seconds from a testing state in which a test run is performed to an operating state which allows a fire protection action, such as an extinguishing action, to be performed. Although in the example of FIG. 1 the change is to be carried out in less than 30 seconds, it should be understood in this respect that other time periods are also possible, where the time periods can be determined depending on a specification which is either generally applicable or specific to the fire protection system.

[0095] During the evaluation, the processor unit 10 further determines on the basis of the safety indication whether the system 2 is configured to change, in case of a loss of primary energy during a test run, the fire protection system 3 from a testing state to an operational readiness state in which the fire protection system 3 is ready for operation, i.e. in which it can switch to the operating state.

[0096] Furthermore, the processor unit 10 determines, during the evaluation on the basis of the benchmark value indication, that the storage heights of the materials within the fire protection area specified for the fire protection system 3 are below the specified limit values and that the extinguishing fluid supply by the fire protection system 3 within the fire protection area meets the necessary requirements.

[0097] If the evaluation by the processor unit 10 shows that the system 2in the case of a test runcan guarantee both a changing to the operating state and to the operational readiness state, depending on the corresponding event, and that the necessary frame-work conditions of organizational fire protection are complied with, the processor unit generates a corresponding certification indication and outputs it to the display unit 13. The display unit 13 generates a graphical representation of the certification indication and outputs it to a user. The user is thus notified that the system 2 can be certified. The user can then issue the certification. In some embodiments the certification may also be issued automatically via the communication link 40.

[0098] The certification obtained in this manner may then either be permanent or limited to a certain, fixed time period. During this time period, regular checks are preferably carried out to compare the quality of the components used with the fire protection system 3 initially tested. This quality can be indicated by the quality indication. If the quality indication meets a predefined minimum value, the certification can be extended after the specified period of time. However, if the quality indication indicates that the quality is no longer guaranteed, an extension of the certification can be refused. The quality indication can be determined in particular on the basis of the test parameters andoptionallyon the basis of external information (for example, from the product market).

[0099] The processor unit 10 is further configured to write the received test parameter into the memory 12. If the test system 1 is then used to regularly carry out tests of the system 2, the individual test parameters received can be stored in the memory 12 as a test history in order to be able to trace their progression over time. This in particular makes it possible to determine the time intervals between the tests and can also serve to verify that the tests have been carried out regularly and correctly.

[0100] Although in the specific embodiment of FIG. 1 the test of a pump 50 was described as an exemplary embodiment of an automated test run, the test system may, alternatively or additionally, test specifications of other automated test runs. Another example is an alarm test. In the case of an alarm test, the optical and acoustic alarming is automatically checked. Here, again, it must be guaranteed that the test run is terminated in case of fire and that the fire protection system 3 transitions to the operating state and/or that the test run is interrupted in case of a power failure and the fire protection system 3 transitions to the operational readiness state. In the case of a transition to the operating state, it is advantageous if the optical and acoustic alarming is configured in such a way that it outputs an indication indicating that the alarm presently being issued is no longer part of the test run, but that an actual fire has occurred. The meeting of this requirement for an indication may also be checked through the test method, for example.

[0101] FIG. 2 schematically shows a flow chart of a test method 1000 according to the invention, which is carried out by the test system 1.

[0102] In step S100, the receiving device 11 of the test system 1 receives at least one test parameter from the system 2 for the automated monitoring of the protective readiness of a fire protection system 3. The receiving device 11 then passes the test parameter received in this manner to the processor unit 10 for evaluation of the test parameter.

[0103] In step S200 the processor unit 10 starts to evaluate the at least one test parameter. In the specific embodiment of FIG. 2, the evaluation in step S200 first comprises determining, by means of the processor unit 10, an identification of a component of the system 2 and comparing the identification with a corresponding list of approved components.

[0104] In step S300 the processor unit 10 further determines, based on a functional readiness indication comprised by the test parameter, whether, in the event of a fire, the system 2 is configured to change the fire protection system 3 within a period of less than 30 seconds from a testing state to an operating state and, based on the safety indication, whether the system 2 is configured to change the fire protection system 3 from a testing state to an operational readiness state in case of a loss of primary energy during a test run.

[0105] In step 400 the processor unit 10 further determines on the basis of the benchmark value indication that the storage heights of the materials within the fire protection area specified for the fire protection system 3 are below the specified limit values and that the extinguishing fluid supply by the fire protection system 3 within the fire protection area meets the necessary requirements.

[0106] In step S501 the processor unit 10 then identifies, on the basis of an evaluation result contained in the test parameter, the tested measurement parameters contained in the evaluation result. In step S502 the processor unit 10 compares the measurement parameters determined in this way with a specification which specifies which measurement parameters must be tested by the system 2 in order to be able to assume a functionality of the system 2 in conformity with the specification, and determines whether all measurement parameters to be tested according to the specification were actually tested by the system 2.

[0107] In step S600 the processor unit 10 concludes that the components used in the system 2 and identified by the identification comply with the specifications and generates a corresponding approval indication. In step S700 the processor unit 10 further concludes thatin case of a test runthe system 2 can guarantee both a changing to the operating state and to the operational readiness state and generates a corresponding certification indication.

[0108] In step S800 the evaluation of the processor unit 10 further shows that all measurement parameters which according to the specifications are to be tested by the system 2 have been tested by the system 2, i.e. that the system 2 is configured to test and evaluate all specified measurement parameters. The processor unit 10 then generates a corresponding completeness indication.

[0109] In step S900 the processor unit 10 then uses the results of the evaluation to generate a quality indication indicating the quality of the monitoring of the protection readiness by the system 2. If this quality indication indicates that the quality of monitoring is high, the system 2 is able to operate as configured.

[0110] If the displayed quality is below a predefined quality threshold, the test system 1 can output a notification to prompt a user to adjust the system 2 to improve the quality of the monitoring. In some embodiments this notification may be a notification to shorten the time intervals between test runs, for example.

[0111] In some embodiments the generation and output of the quality indication in step S900 further comprises an automatic reaction of the system to the quality value indicated by the quality indication falling below a quality threshold value. This means that in some embodiments the system may be configured to automatically make corresponding changes to improve the quality of the monitoring.

[0112] These changes may be specified by the test system as part of the quality indication or may be determined by the system 2 itself. Further embodiments are conceivable.

LIST OF UTILIZED REFERENCE NUMBERS

[0113] Test system 1 [0114] Processor unit 10 [0115] Receiving device 11 [0116] Memory 12 [0117] Display unit 13 [0118] System for automated monitoring of protection readiness 2 [0119] Fire protection system 3 [0120] First sensor 31 [0121] Second sensor 32 [0122] Communication link 40 [0123] Peripheral device 50 [0124] High rack 60 [0125] Test method 1000 [0126] Receipt of the test parameter S100 [0127] Identification of a component S200 [0128] Evaluation of the functional readiness indication and safety indication S300 [0129] Evaluation of the benchmark value indication S400 [0130] Identification of the tested measurands S501 [0131] Comparison with the measurands to be tested S502 [0132] Approval of the component S600 [0133] Verification of the functional readiness indication and safety indication S700 [0134] Verification of the measurands S800 [0135] Generation of the quality indicator S900