Re: Here's one for the books

["Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have a feeling that the panel would have sent a signal since it was the AC
power part of the panel that cooked not the rest of the board, it would have
shown ac failure...for a while

Be an interesting thing to test for sure

"Dave" <google.3.trustme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1112234058.745043.28570@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> A smoke detector above the panel wouldn't have helped on this one.  It
> was the panel that caught fire.  By the time the smoke went off, there
> wouldn't have been much left of that panel to send signals.  But yeah,
> the code requires it, so we should do it.
>
> J. Sloud wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:37:29 -0500, "R.H.Campbell"
> > <rh.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > >But thinking about it afterwards, this panel could have burned the
> whole
> > >damn building down. Who says low voltage equipment poses no risks
> !!!!!
> > >
> > >RHC
> >
> > How's Canadian fire code read regarding using non-Listed panels for
> > smoke detection?  NFPA72 specifically forbids using non-Listed
> > equipment for any type of fire alarm detecting or reporting.  Per
> > NFPS72, you'd also need to have a smoke above the control panel that
> > would have been quite effective in preventing the building from
> > burning down.  Good thing this didn't happen in the middle of the
> > night.
>