COMPARISON BETWEEN NATURAL SMOKE VENT AND TUBE AXIAL SMOKE EXTRACT FANS

Features Natural Smoke vent Ducted smoke extract (Tube Axial Fan)

Fail safe operation Failsafe operation can be enabled by use of Fusible links or battery back up Operation depends on reliable power supplies

Noise during operation Silent operation as no high-speed rotating components are involved Too noisy when run under fire conditions due to higher speed operation

Self-compensating Can accommodate bigger than design fires as they cause higher buoyancy and higher extract rates The airflow rate is fixed and cannot accommodate any additional requirements than design

No time limit to operation as once opened they will remain active. Will be operational for days without external power (Minimum 72
No Time limit of operation hrs as standard) Can operate only till rated operation limits eg- 2 hrs for F400 or F300 rating

Weight of unit Light weight and does not need separate supporting structures Comparatively much heavier and dynamic loading during operation mandates the need for separate support structures

Operation costs/energy consumption No operational cost and nominal power consumption (24-48W) with minimal cabling High energy consumption and costlier cabling

Maintenance requirements Maintenance free operation Requires periodic maintenance

Ducted applications Not suited for complex ducting. Suitable for complex and branched ducting

Smoke ventilators are installing above the soaker panel at the roof with water proofing, however, there is possibility of leakage due Since fans are the inline ducted type locating at the roof installing directly above the concrete slab, there will not be any
Water Leakage to poor workmanship which can be avoided by proper workmanship. water leakage issue.

Consultant's Reccomendation Our reccomendation is to use Smoke Ventilators instead of Smoke Fan Due to Cost impact and more reliable operations