Commercial kitchens and food plants combine open heat, oils, grease-laden extract, and process equipment that may run continuously. A fire can start at a fryer and involve the hood, the duct, and the compartment above if those parts of the strategy were specified in isolation.
We design protection for the equipment and for the building. That may include local application, water mist, sprinklers, detection, or a combination. There is no single kitchen package that fits a restaurant line, a high-care factory, and a bakery the same way.
Equipment, extract, and the compartment
Hood and duct protection is necessary in many cooking environments, but it does not replace compartmentation, escape, or building-level suppression. Our article on fire suppression for commercial kitchens and food production lines walks through that split.
Wet chemical systems are the usual local application for Class F cooking-oil fires on fryers and ranges. They discharge onto the appliance and into the canopy. They do not automatically protect a long duct run, and they are not the compartment strategy if fire leaves the line. A fire can move into the hood, plenum, and duct after the local system has operated. The design should say whether canopy and duct protection is in scope, how detection is zoned, and how a discharge shuts fans down.
Hygiene and restart time also belong in the design conversation. Some sites cannot tolerate a wet-down of the whole hall. Others are more concerned with oil fires at a defined appliance. Those are different problems.
Water mist is not a kitchen package
Water mist can be considered for some cooking or process compartments where the system is approved for that hazard and the geometry supports the spray. It is not a drop-in replacement for an appliance-level wet chemical system. Water quality, cleaning access, and what happens to open product if the system discharges belong in the same decision as the nozzle layout.
A restaurant service line, a high-care factory, and a bakery can share a heading on a drawing and still need different protection. Continuous or unattended plant, overnight cooking, and wash-down regimes change both the detector choice and the suppression type. Detection copied from an office will nuisance-alarm in steam and aerosols, or miss the fire the process actually produces.
Duties and what a review should cover
In England and Wales, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 requires a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment and general fire precautions. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own fire safety legislation. Approved Document B covers relevant building work in England. None of those documents selects a kitchen package.
A useful review names the appliances and how they are used, including unattended operation, the oil type and vat size, extract cleaning records, any suppression already fitted, and the fuel or ventilation interlocks. If cover depends on insurer conditions, those conditions should be in the pack before the system is ordered.
Standards, insurers, and next steps
Kitchen projects often arrive with insurer expectations already attached. We work from the fire risk assessment, the process description, and those comments, then produce a design that consultants can review.
If you are specifying a new line or replacing ageing hood protection, contact our engineers with drawings and a short description of the cooking or process hazard.
