Jump to content


Power Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Forgive my ignorance but Regulation 38 of what? Don’t forget the United Kingdom is anything but United!
  2. I hate to say it but BC have accepted a scribble on a piece of rough paper stating that an Armstrong suspended ceiling has been selected and installed according to manufacturers instructions. The ceiling is in a large commercial kitchen below a bedroom floor in a hotel. It was required to have 60min resistance. Having had a good look at it, I am not convinced at all. Neither I nor BC were provided with specification details so I have really no way of making an informed determination. What bewilders me is that BC don’t seem to have learned anything from the tragedy of Grenfell. Are they nothing
  3. Anthony makes a good point. I do very little work in the domestic sector but I note that in HMO land this arrangement is often universal, at least here in NI. Usually mixed systems employed with 5839-1 in the common areas linked to AHDs behind flat doors and then a 5839-6 system in the flats. Care in opening a door in to a fire is a matter of education but even without ASDs in the common hall, the smell and sound of fire is likely to result in the occupants investigating anyway.
  4. I would say definitely not if it is for BC approval. It is probably reasonable to allow a standard frame but from your description the opening is 1500mm above ffl.
  5. Worth having a look at this system as an alternative to the typical grade D systems. However, the system has only one li-ion battery which provides 72hours of backup. Many housing authorities may not accept this as lots of electrical installations have card meters.
  6. We have just completed a small restaurant with kitchen to rear. Relatively large open serving hatch direct in to sales area (no shutters) with door adjacent. That is fairly typical nowadays. Client wanted to remove door for ease of access. Door is a FD30s. Only one exit to front so customers seeing a fire situation can turn their back on the fire and make an immediate exit. BC will not permit removal of door. Anyone up for wrestling with the logic?
  7. You might even do a better job than Mr Sparks or some other so-called competent enterprise. Quite often sparks don’t hang around for full 3 hour test. For some it’s just a quick flick of the test key. I know one fire extinguisher company who can arrive at 12.30pm leave at 1.45pm carry out test and maintenance on over 30 extinguishers and do a three hour test on the emergency lighting! They hadn’t the wit to alter their time of arrival / departure on their service docket. get a system going and keep good records and you’ll be grand. One thing I would caution is to keep an eye on the green ch
  8. Definitely not Tom. Delayed, phased evacuation requires stringent managerial oversight. Staff in such places are often low calibre and staff turn-over often high. Drills are seldom undertaken and if they are, they are not properly done. The consumption of alcohol is likely to be on the high side and control of numbers not properly implemented. Besides, this club has a manual fire alarm system. I have recommended upgrading to at least category L3 but it will remain simultaneous evacuation. It is interesting for me to note that no dispensation has been given to any other venue in this Counc
  9. Given the availability of two other exits, I would agree with Tom. However, I would formally risk-assess the situation and record as an addendum to the FRA. Further, it could be construed as a matter that would require LABC approval through Building Control. An application in that direction, even if it is a regularisation, may be prudent.
  10. We have a social club with the main entrance doors open in. The doors are on one of only two escape routes. The building has three storeys with a possibility of around 600 persons. Conditions of licence made by LABC say that either the doors are held open or they are manned. Neither condition is likely to be met as the main entrance does not have a lobby and the weather would just pour in. Manning is likely to be by a wee man who gets paid in pints and needs to visit the loo on a regular basis. My FRA rejects the situation as most unwise. Don’t know what you think but FRS didn’t either notice
  11. Travel distance for a C2 risk profile in one direction according to Table 15 in 9999 2017 is 9m. At the bottom of the same table it says; “The two-way travel distance limit for hotels is measured from the entrance to the bedroom/suite, not from the most remote part of the bedroom/suite”. Thus the implication is that one way travel should not be measured from the entrance door of the bedroom. That would be almost impossible to achieve and I do believe a mistake has been made in 9999 in that regard. It would seem to me that an allocation of 9m in the bedroom and 9m in the protected corridor
  12. Lyledunn


    Thank you Tom. Very interesting and useful reference.
  13. Lyledunn


    Actually, marquees are only exempt buildings in Northern Ireland. Not so in England, Scotland or Wales. Another example of a very disjointed so called United Kingdom
  14. Lyledunn


    Thank you Tom. My question was poorly worded and written in a rush. The kernel of the matter is that we have a marquee located only 2m from a building. The former is an exempt building under building regulations whilst the latter is an existing building of some age. If the marquee was to be determined as a building to which the building regulations did apply then it’s wall facing the existing structure would need to offer 60min fire resistance with a minimum SOF. I can find nothing prescriptive in relation to how far a marquee should be from an existing building or a relevant boundary. Six met
  15. Lyledunn


    I have a marquee situated about 2m from an emergency exit from a hotel. The marquee has an occupancy of around 300 so that gives some idea of size. Marquees are exempted from building regulations so it would appear that any perceived risk is assessed using standard methods. Anyone have comments or had issues?
  • Create New...