Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Trying to establish around retro fitting smoke control in old buildings.

I have buildings where we have POVs and i do see the need to change these to AOVs as this was the standard of the day.

My question is where you have a three story, two staircase buildings. Both lobbied and balcony access to both. Is there any requirement to install window opening on the stairs for the Fire service to manual vent the stairs. Present arrangement has no smoke control.

my arguement is this is how it was built, plus two staircases so if one is compromised you can turn hour back and use the alternative.

smoke is also not going risk the means of escape as it is not an enlcosed corridor to the stairs as its balcony access to both stairs.

Any thoughts. Purpose built flats has a case study for 6 storey building scenario but with enclosed protected corridor and no lobby. Which i can understand the logic of smoke control as its not lobbied. 

Posted

Hi, No straight onto a balcony which then has a door leading to the staircase. So lobbied. Plus two stair.

my argument is that this was the standard it was built to so no requirement to bring upto todays  standard for smoke control AOVsor even openable windows which is what the FRA says.

Posted

I wouldn't expect AOV even on a new build with that layout as the stair is remote from the risk. Compliant at the time of the build hasn't been acceptable as an automatic get out for fire safety since 2006 (it's not the same as Building Regulations that retain the hard stop on backward application) and the risk assessment determines whether the existing precautions still provide an adequate level of safety (some are proven to be now ineffective), some part modernisation or mitigation is needed, or, full modernisation is required. A good example is the guidance around fire doors in blocks of flats - sometimes original notional doors can remain, sometimes they need modernising with intumescent seals & smoke brushes and in some cases whole door sets need replacement with certified new ones.

Based on the risk as presented (but with the caveat I've not been there and only have your description) I don't see a need for retrospective smoke control either!

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...