AnthonyB

You don't have an activated call point somewhere? Apollo Alarmsense is a conventional twin wire fire alarm system where sounders and call points/detectors share the same zone cable and have to use a compatible 2 wire panel. Apollo's fault finding guide suggests that continuous sounders indicate a non Alarmsense compatible panel has been used (different 2 wire panel or a traditional 4 wire) (or indeed the conventional sounder circuits instead of the Alarmsense zones) Apollo don't make the panels. Compatible panels are made by C-Tec, Haes and Kentec. Ask also on firealarmengineers.com/forum

DfEE guidance states "There should be a fire drill at least once a year and preferably once a term."

Your local fire service has a department for enforcing fire safety legislation whose details are on their website (usually after following links for Business Fire Safety or Fire Safety at Work). You should contact them with your concerns and they will carry out an audit and act accordingly. What you have been told is completely non compliant (it wouldn't even have complied with the regulations over 50 years ago!) although it is permissible to have only one stair or exit in some circumstances.

If this is an AOV forming part of the smoke management system rather than just environmental control then it affects the efficacy of the built in fire strategy (usually stay put with smoke extraction to the communal space) and would potentially be an offence. You should contact your local fire service's enforcement department, who will inspect and advise accordingly, and as a last resort can carry out formal enforcement action.

Best thing to fit is a swing free closer as used widely in care homes, then the door doesn't close at all unless there is a fire alarm or you shut it manually as you would normal domestic door. Problem is you then need a suitable fire alarm system to link the closer to...... Try other manufacturers for ideas such as: Briton (http://www.allegion.com/uk) FireCo (http://www.fireco.uk/) Geofire (http://www.geofire.co.uk/)

It's up to your Fire Risk Assessment as that determines what is acceptable for the risk, British Standards are not law and whilst useful benchmarks can reasonably be varied from in some situations . The enforcing authorities only have a role where a premises falls below a standard at which there is a threat to safety and there is more than one solution for a particular risk. Also the stance of authorities varies around the UK and sometimes within the same brigade! The main issue with mag locks in places of assembly is that they can render a panic proof exit (i.e. fitted with panic bolts so that the pressure alone of a body of occupants, who may be in a panicked state, will automatically release the doors without the need for a positive action, thus preventing crushing and jamming of the doors) not panic proof as if are relying on the positive action of someone knowing about, locating and activating a small green break glass next to the door. Having said that it could be argued that a Critical Application (Category A as was) compliant locking system linked to the fire alarm has enough redundancy to ensure that the doors will always have the mag lock dropped in an emergency so that the door will remain panic proof when the first set of occupiers reach it. There are what if's though, such as will the fire alarm always activate before people start to leave (depends on your system, equipment and the risks present) and what happens in the event of a non fire incident causing a panic evacuation (large fight, active shooter, bomb threat, etc) It's for you and your competent risk assessor to come up with justification and consult with the enforcing authority and see if they will go with it. If not, then if you are convinced and can evidence why safety isn't compromised you can apply for a determination by the Secretary of State (which has a fair chance, he doesn't always side with the fire service) it all depends how desperate you are to have mag locks rather than just panic furniture,

If you have carried out work subject to the Building Regulations then any resultant smoke & heat alarms required must be Grade D hard wired. A decent contractor can fit these without too much mess and you shouldn't need cables linking them everywhere if you use radio linked bases (http://www.safelincs.co.uk/radio-interlinked-smoke-alarms/) If it is your own home, you are not renting it out or using it as a HMO, then you can fit anything you want although the use of Grade F alarms is increasingly associated with fire fatalities due to battery removal or failure to replace flat batteries, if you are going down this route sealed long life (10 year) units are best (http://www.safelincs.co.uk/10-year-sealed-battery-smoke-alarms/) At the end of the day it's a choice of what price your safety, you are far far more likely to die from fire in your own home than in any type of commercial premises, including hotels.

The outer container is just that, the outer container. There is no legislation regarding fire blankets in the UK, but there is a manufacturing and testing standard BS EN 1869:1997. If you are using the fabric for fire retardant rather than extinguishing then BS 476-4:1970 & BS 476-7:1997 may be more appropriate.

Tapered threads are still used in Steel bodied extinguishers, which are still offered as economy models by a couple of manufacturers, but for decades now aluminium bodied extinguishers have used parallel threads - early aluminium body extinguishers in the late 60's and 70's did use tapered threads but were often beset with leaks & split necks. There is actually very little law around extinguishers, most is just standards, however it's amazing how many non existent laws and standards are trotted out to sell new extinguishers. If it's post 2002 and CE marked (unless refurbished) it will be legal.

"In some situations 'glazed vision panels' or 'glazed apertures' are required to be added to the door to allow for additional light or vision of the other side of the door. Non-glazed apertures may be required in the case of louvre panels or air transfer grilles. The addition of ANY apertures will seriously affect the performance of the door unless it is undertaken ONLY by companies that are licensed and approved to carry out this type of work to agreed procedures. Cutting and glazing apertures must NEVER be undertaken on site and will negate the door's test certificate." Source: http://www.bwfcertifire.org.uk/knowledge-centre/installation

Unless it's a very big yard it's not a place of safety, especially if the fire spreads, and would necessitate fire service rescue which is contrary to the principle that means of escape should be designed such that all occupiers can safety self evacuate without external assistance. A locked yard would need some way of opening from the inside without a key or code.

The stair lift could narrow the stair below the minimum 800mm (750mm in certain situations) and also you would need to ensure that there was sufficient battery capacity to allow the lift to evacuate someone if the fire took out the power supply. Also if the stair is not a protected route the time to evacuate could be too long - also does the first floor have a protected refuge area for the stair lift user whilst the other persons upstairs leave (to prevent bottlenecks caused by the lift user going first.) A lot of building stock in this country was not built with accessibility in mind and a fair proportion of that cannot be reasonably made accessible at all or in a way that would be safe in a fire and care needs to be taken when choosing premises.

Best practice says to use the signs, but this we have a risk based provision regulatory system so if you can justify not signing you should be OK - if the routes have no realistic likelihood of obstruction due to lack of realising the exit is for emergency use what benefit does the signage bring?

Depends on the exit widths required for the likely occupancy. In some cases sufficient width for the numbers present would remain, in others it would be insufficient leading to extended evacuation times, bunching & possible crushing. You should consult the competent person responsible for your fire risk assessments for detailed advice

Staged alarms have been used in some schools for some time, the investigative stage in my school was a continuous bell with an intermittent bell for evacuate (the opposite of what it should be in standards, but this was a very old system!) You could have a staff alarm using the methods as Tom suggests, other places will have a staff alarm at the panel (if situated near a suitably constantly staffed reception) others use intermittent sounders. Silencing the alarm to investigate would not be acceptable and there have been prosecutions in serious fires where this has been done. In conventional (non addressable) systems (& depending on the programming settings even with some addressable systems) if you silence a zone you have no redundancy as the call points and detectors on that zone will not cause the system to re-alarm if there is a fire that spreads (or someone sees it and breaks another call point) and you are purely reliant on the investigation team going back to the main panel (or communicating if you use radios). You would need to get a staged alarm programmed in the panel and the FRA and Fire Procedure amended in consultation with the appropriate authorities.

Many enforcing authorities and Courts seem to like an annual review - note that review is not redoing the whole assessment, just checking it's still valid and that the preventative, training and maintenance regimes are still being done as per the FRA. Many places doing this will append a memo, letter or short proforma to the FRA each year stating that they have carried out the review and the FRA still stands. If the review reveals the FRA may no longer be correct for whatever reason, then you start the process again and either amend the FRA or produce a whole new one as indicated.

Smoke seals must be fitted to fire doors protecting escape routes. Smoke seals are important to enable occupiers to escape down the protected route without being subjected to smoke which can be toxic, impede breathing and affect vision. Cool smoke, often given off by smouldering furnishings and electrical equipment, is exceptionally toxic and tends not to rise and thus will not operate smoke detectors on escape routes, therefore smoke seals on fire doors are essential. This phenomenon, plus the fire gases passing through the cracks around doors (back when doors fire doors just had rebates or early intumescent seals with no smoke brushes) can produce smoke sufficiently dense and cool for a corridor to become smokelogged before adequate warning can be given by detectors in the corridor itself - this is why in the 1980's guidance on the provision of detection for hotels was updated to require detectors in rooms and Categories of system were born with L3 being the minimum detection category (rooms opening onto escape route and the escape route). So with no smoke control to the doors you risk the escape route becoming untenable (or logged enough to put users off going through it) without a single detector activating. With smoke brushes you hold back most by products with the first leakage being hot smoke at the upper edge that will trigger a corridor head before the door fails.

If you are purely a damp proofing firm then you shouldn't be messing with fire doors as the trades are not related. If you don't have competent trained staff with the correct tools and consumables then there is a big chance that you will not do it correctly and everyone looses in the long run. I've seen work by joiners that is abysmal and non compliant or using completely outdated techniques that go back to the 60's & 70's door standards and would want work to be done by an accredited specialist. Stick to what you are good at.

These are all ABC Powder!

Extinguishers are not provided for means of escape, that's an old myth, but to mitigate the effects of fire and if one fails you get out. The risk of failure is minimal if you have a suitable system of maintenance and buy decent quality kit.

Because some people follow common sense (& risk assessment) and do not rigidly follow the recommendations of BS5306-8 which has been ruined by the trade representatives on the Committee to sell extinguishers. If it's a floor area under 400 sq.m. then in some circumstances the potential 4 extinguishers per floor (if you use separate CO2 for electrical risks) is just plain overkill, especially in premises small enough for a single exit.

Which would potentially still be wrong, just not under fire legislation!

Most UK extinguishers contain ABC (General or All Purpose) Powder based on mono-ammonium phosphate & sulphate - usually yellow (but with far east imports you can get blue, green, orange/pink). It is slightly acidic and fuses into a sticky flux when hot (which is how it is effective on Class A solid fires by coating embers) This powder as a result has a high secondary damage potential to delicate items, electronics & machinery. It is non toxic, but mildly irritant. A small number of aerosol and small automotive extinguishers contain BC (Standard Powder) which is Sodium Hydrogen Carbonate and usually white. It is slightly alkaline (hence it's use in kitchens before the development of wet chemical as it had a slight saponific effect on cooking oils). It does not flux and has less damage potential, is easier to clean and less irritant. It is not effective on deep seated Class A fires as it does not flux around embers. Specialist BC powders exist for high risk environments (Potassium Bicarbonate "Purple K" and Potassium Allophonate/Potassium Bircarbonate/Urea Complex "Monnex") but these are not found in general use due to cost. BC & ABC Powders main extinguishing effect is by chemically interrupting the chain of combustion with little appreciable cooling or smothering effect so there is a risk of re-ignition after use and with a Class B fire if you don't extinguish it all in one go the fire can instantly re-flash to it's original size. Class D fires (flammable metals) have specialist powders, choice dependant on the metal involved - these use Sodium Chloride, Graphite or Copper to absorb heat and flux over the metal allowing it too cool. Where US terminology is used instead of UK then ABC & BC extinguishers are called Dry Chemical with the term Dry Powder being used only for Class D agents.

If it's a means of escape Building Regulations doesn't usually allow electro-mechanical locks such as electronic keeps, but prefers electromagnetic locks. If however there is an internal means of unlatching the door without operating the keep/strike (tumbturn operated deadlock latch or a night latch [Yale lock]) then it's OK as releasing the door does not rely on the electromechanical part of the access system.

Your fire risk assessment would have to justify why deviating from the benchmark of weekly testing would not lower the standard of life safety of the relevant persons. It's possible, that's the point of risk assessment, but you need to back it up as enforcers will initially look for weekly tests unless you convince them why monthly is OK