AnthonyB
-
Posts
2,327 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by AnthonyB
-
-
This is what the general fire safety guidance says:
"Electromechanical devices
Electromechnical devices comprise electromechanical lock keeps and draw bolts, which can be controlled by people inside the premises by entering a code or by using ‘smart cards’, which have been adapted to control the exit from certain areas. These devices have been fitted in many premises and may be linked to the fire-detection and/or warning system. Experience has shown that these devices can fail to open in a number of ways. They are dependent on a spring mechanism to return the lock keep or draw bolt(s) and are liable to jam when pressure is applied to the door. It is also relatively easy to fit them incorrectly.
Electromechanical locking devices are normally unacceptable on escape doors, unless they are fitted with a manual means of overriding the locking mechanism such as a push bar, push pad or lever handle or that they do not rely on a spring mechanism, fail-safe open and are not affected by pressure, in which case the criteria for electromagnetic devices should be applied."
Not much help on maintaining fire integrity of the doorset!
Have you asked the BWF or the Guild of Architectural Ironmongers - both provide useful guidance.
-
Recommendation technically. It would achieve the aim of getting everyone out but would make it difficult to correctly identify the area in alarm.
It must be old to have a one zone panel, you could save on re-cabling by changing the devices and panel to addressable and program the zones, but there is no other short cut on conventional systems as if you changed the conventional panel to one with multiple zones whilst you could keep the devices you would have to change all the cabling to split into zones.
-
I very much doubt it, most extinguishers are sold overpriced as it's a niche market and they don't sell or are reduced. Water & chemical foam extinguishers will rot through eventually if full and vapourising liquids ones are hazardous (and illegal). Powders and CO2 are no harm left charged, but weight is an issue when you are filling a wall or shelf full of them!
Halon 1211 extinguishers are worth more full because of it's rarity and are sort after for continued legal air use as well as illegal other uses (because they are damn good extinguishers!)
-
Dangerous game though with chemicals & wets generally as they will eventually pin hole (or worse if they pressurise) due to corrosion and then are worthless.
-
There is no extra value in being full, just risk. I empty all mine. External condition is the key to value.
The tops come off anticlockwise, couple of taps on the lugs to loosen then slowly unscrew. You will see the cage and bottle at the top of the cylinder, gently lift it all out and you can pour out the contents.
-
For the vast majority of purpose built flats the official advice remains stay put unless affected by fire or smoke. There should be a fire risk assessment for the block which will advise on the required evacuation policy for your building, check with the communal areas management company.
-
It's the sort of premises where if you don't box it off it will get stuff stocked against it, a managed solution. Looks too tight to replace the shelves with metal cabinets with lockable metal doors as another alternative.
-
You are being spun the usual sales rubbish about signs having to be rigid plastic, photoluminescent, etc.
Self adhesive is fine.
-
The British Standard allows for the user to carry out all the routine tests and the installer should have instructed the user on handover accordingly.
"Routine inspections and tests
Emergency lighting systems should be inspected and tested at regular intervals in accordance with BS EN 50172.
NOTE 1 The testing may be performed manually, but if the responsible person is unable to ensure that this will be done, it is advisable to use an automatic test
system to perform the tests at the required intervals.
NOTE 2 Provision of a periodic inspection and test certificate is specified in BS EN 50172:2004, 6.2. An example of a suitable inspection and test certificate,
which can be used for all new installations, major alterations and existing premises, is given in Annex M.
Functional operation should be checked at least every month (see 13.1).
Testing for full rated duration should be performed on each luminaire at least annually. One of the following precautions should be taken during the full rated
duration tests:
a) perform the test while the building is empty or at times of minimal risk; or
b) only test alternate luminaires at any one time, so that the building has a charged luminaire next to the unit under test.
A visual inspection should be performed on each luminaire at least annually.
NOTE 3 These precautions are needed because as the full rated duration tests require discharging the batteries, the emergency lighting system is not fully
functional until the batteries have had time to recharge.
NOTE 4 The minimum duration periods of the system are given in 6.7.3.
In the event of failure of any parts of the system, a competent person should be used to repair the fault. Alternative safety procedures should be introduced
until the repair is complete and the system has been retested satisfactorily. The responsible person for the building should decide on the appropriate action to
be taken for their premises to maintain occupants’ safety during this time.
NOTE 5 Examples of possible actions include:
• warning occupants to be extra vigilant until the system is rectified;
• initiating extra safety patrols;
• issuing torches as a temporary measure;
• in a high risk situation, limiting use of all or part of the building.
The results of tests and any repair action should be recorded in the log book.
If safety patrols are likely to be needed to assist evacuation in the event of equipment failure, suitable rechargeable portable hand lamps should be
provided, such as those conforming to BS EN 60598-2-22:2014, Annex E.
NOTE 6 It is expected that advice on conducting routine tests will have been given to the user as part of the handover procedure given in 10.7.
NOTE 7 Routine inspections and tests are specified in BS EN 50172:2004, 7.2.
An automatic test system for battery powered systems is specified in BS EN 62034."The user can complete the BS annual duration test certificate, a competent person is only required for repairs according to the BS
-
In lovely condition for museum & collector purposes, too good to ruin & turn into a lamp.
I wouldn't discharge them as the cylinder (well cone!) may be too corroded to stand the pressure, but would usually remove the acid bottle (carefully!) pour the soda solution into a bucket and (wearing the right PPE) crack the bottle into the soda to neutralise the acid.
Wouldn't mind one myself!
-
Yes, but it will limit your occupancy to 60 in the building.
-
In most buildings the main 'everyday' entrance is used as part of the means of escape capacity.
-
LABC usually require fire grade Rockwool stuffing suitably sealed in, there is also an intumescent foam designed for frames called Blue 60, which if used within manufacturers instructions and parameters will also suit.
Pink aerosol fire foam is a waste of time as it doesn't work for 99% of the things people ignorantly use it for - it's actually only tested and OK for a very finite number of situations, usually very narrow and deep linear gaps between a concrete wall & floor slab and not much else (regardless of the complete fantasy on most cans and supplier websites)
-
Not usually, no, the preferred solution is to build a cupboard/store room out of the space using 30 minute fire resisting construction & fire doors.
Sprinklers are the slowest means of detection and your stair could be smoke logged before activation, plus with the storage you will not get the 500mm sprinkler head clearance to the understair head so it won't be effective and you will loose the escape route - likewise if there is no understair head the nearest ceiling head discharge will be obstructed by the stair rise and you will loose the escape route.
If you are a large retailer you ought to have a Primary Authority arrangement - if you put a FRA proposal together with suitable fire engineering calculations that justify your case you can run it past them like Sainsbury did with fire alarm weekly testing going to monthly.
-
Are you going upstairs (or going to the corner of a large open area)? If not then you do not use the up/left arrow.
If you have to pass through a doorway it should have a compliant sign with an up arrow above it.
If you need to turn left there should be a compliant sign on the wall with a left arrow on it (although if it's a very small lobby/area such that as soon as you pass through the first door you can clearly see the next door and sign I might be tempted not to need the sign)
Change in direction, passing through a door and changing level all require their own signs, there are no shortcuts by putting anything other than an up arrow* above a door
* a lot of people put a down arrow above a door to point at the door to show 'this door' which is technically wrong, but a debate all in itself as to how much of a real issue it is.
-
Yes, get a competent qualified fire alarm engineer in to install, commission & service your system.
-
No it can't, you are putting relevant persons at severe risk and it's one of the few cases where a Fire Service inspector would likely jump straight to a Prohibition Notice and if not complied with prosecution.
Sleeping risk cases that get to court often have custodial sentences, both suspended and actual imprisonment.
Depending on the size, nature and layout of the premises a temporary solution might be possible.
-
Are they competent to an evidence provable standard that would be upheld in a court of law and able to carry out the work using the correct materials in the correct manner so they would perform as designed? If so then, yes. Whilst using Third Party Accredited specialist contractors is always the preferred choice it isn't (yet) law.
A middle ground that some places use is that they carry out the work themselves then have the TPC contractor inspect and sign off the work which still works out more cost effective than just handing the whole job over.
-
Simple answer - yes.
-
Ideally not for health & safety purposes, but with some of the older building stock in the UK it can be unavoidable. Of course 'road' can be anything from a low traffic volume side street to a major arterial route - a risk assessment would be needed to balance the issues of escape v live highway risks
-
It's simple - once you are out you are out. Any plan to sweep the premises should ensure that it is done as part of initial response and evacuation. Once someone is outside the building and at a place of ultimate safety it would almost certainly be considered a risk to relevant persons to make them re-enter.
In theory, with an addressable fire alarm system, knowing the exact location of the incident you could argue that you could ensure you were avoiding the risk area, but I've never heard of this, plus without radio communications and someone monitoring the progress of the incident on the control panel you wouldn't know if it (or more importantly smoke/combustion products) was spreading your way
If you are in a unionised workplace then it's certainly one for your union H&S rep.
-
Without seeing the premises I cannot give a definitive opinion. Depending on the age of the flats the doors may be notional fire doors, that is to say doors that are of a solid construction, ironmongery & framing that would have met fire doors standards of the time (for example smoke seals and intumescent strips didn't exist until the 1980's, fire doors used a close fit into a rebated frame instead) and in a small block these can be accepted under current guidance as long as self closers are fitted.
Also it sounds like you have a premises with a site wide fire detection & alarm system of the coverage needed as part of a full evacuate policy as oppose to stay put.
And thirdly you have an independent secondary escape.
Taking all these into account it would not be considered essential for modern specification fire doors to be fitted (but desirable as even if everyone can escape in time in the current set up there is a risk of greater smoke and fire spread and consequent damage)
-
This is the ACOP to the regulations which should help you assess the set up, usually an enclosure is vented if used.
-
Most seem to avoid this issue by not accepting items unless they are in good condition & fire labelled.
Fire risk, Items to be removed from under Stairs
in HMO
Posted
There seem to be a multitude of potential issues here and I suspect the premises do not have a suitable Fire Risk Assessment, which due to some of the uses is likely to need to be written.
Guidance for this type of premises is here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/422195/9294_Small_Mediumt_v2.pdf
It sounds like the stair may need to be a protected route meaning you can't have the storage unless you build an under stair cupboard of 30 minutes fire resistance.
It also sounds like it needs an electrical fire detection & warning system to BS5839-1 (not just domestic detection)