Fike FVA-IP, Installation And Operation Manual

Page: 36 / 56

Installation and Operation Manual FVA-IP Camera
32 P/N 06-523 (Rev. 6) Revision Date: June, 2019
6.1.3.1 Difference in Functional and Operational conformance
Functional conformance is defined by the method of detection being valid and applicable for the given conditions and
is determined primarily by a systems specification. Operational conformance is affected by the deterioration of the
system performance over time due to such issues as the long term applicability of the system and the environmental
and natural factors surrounding the camera.
6.1.3.2 Factors affecting Functional Conformance
The FVA‐IP camera based system should only be applied in ways that conform to our manufacturers’
recommendations. Those include:

Minimum/Maximum detection range

Minimal size of flame to be detected

Minimal size of smoke plume to be detected
6.1.3.3 Factors affecting Operational Conformance
Among factors affecting Operational Conformance are the environmental and natural factors.
1. Environmental factors directly affect the integrity of optics (lenses) resulting in deterioration of image quality
beyond the limits prescribed by the manufacturer.
2. Natural factors are caused by aging of the components of the system causing deterioration in overall
performance or catastrophic failure of the entire system.
3. Man‐made factors such as alteration of lens focus, capping the lenses, alteration of camera position and
direction.
The FVA‐IP camera detects fire and smoke by applying sophisticated image analysis algorithms to digitized video
images acquired by the CMOS sensor. One can divide this process into 2 stages. The first stage is formation of the
image and acquisition into the digital form. The second stage is the processing of the sequence of digitized images.
The first stage is analog in nature while second stage is digital. The implication of this division is very important for
how one will address the conformance testing mainly because second stage cannot deteriorate gradually over time.
If
components of the system in the second stage degrade beyond the acceptable limit, the system simply fails resulting
in an off‐line condition.
For the first stage, such deterioration, primarily optical integrity or degeneration of the
sensitivity of the sensor will result in significant degradation of the acquired image quality and will be detected by the
second stage as fault condition and reported accordingly.
The Fike Video Analytics built‐in self‐diagnostics will address most accidental man‐made factors and will report faults if
the camera is out‐of‐focus, covered or has been turned towards the wall. Minor alterations of the cameras field of
view is addressed by the semi‐annual inspection.
It is important to note that self‐diagnostics of the image quality is an integral part of the detection analytics. The
image acquisition, alarm algorithms, diagnostic process and communication are all interconnected. Therefore, the
detection part of the analytics cannot fail without the diagnostics part as well as the image processing chain and
communication being left unaffected. As in any digital computer system, it will be an all‐or‐nothing failure with any
failure resulting in a closure of the trouble dry‐contacts and a loss of signal to the user interface.