Author Topic: Delays on Manual Call Points  (Read 27245 times)

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2007, 05:55:23 PM »
Quote from: Chris Houston
.... but would listen to, and consider, their argument.
Insurers don't like this sort of thing.  I think I'm doing Terry a favour by telling him this here frankly and allowing him to get his ducks ina line before he approaches his insurers.  I can't speak on their behalf, but that's the reality.

You'll note above that if it were my call, I'd be happy to consider their proposals.

Offline kurnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6489
    • http://www.peakland-fire-safety.co.uk
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2007, 09:46:08 PM »
What an interesing thread and a good range of well considered arguments.
1- For what its worth my opinion is that all premises should have a means of manually raising the alarm of fire.
2- The siting and spacing of these should generally be in accordance with the codes of practice otherwise this may lead to confusion.
3- It is important that on operating the alarm clear feedback is given to the person operating it  that the alarm is operating- within 3-4 seconds as per BS. Otherwise they may panic and go back into the building looking for alternative means. The Basil Fawlty reaction but this is very real- and while many people do stay calm- but many dont when confronted by a real fire. Their priority becomes alerting their nearest and dearest.
4- A building without manual call points could be considered but in compensation would need multi sensor detection configured for sensitivity to any criteria in isolation. And such a system would lead to more AFD unwanted signals. Theres a balancing act to be carried out between AFD sensitivity, unwanted signals and manual means of raising the alarm.
5- Sprinklers may be a decent alternative:-)
6- The easy ways- alarmed covers as suggested by John may be the easiest first step.
7- If this doesnt work a telephone linked to reception in lieu of a break glass call point may be a reasonable alternative if the language barrier can be overcome

Offline Terry9

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2007, 08:24:33 AM »
Dear Nearlythere,

For 'vandals' read 90% paying customers (either drunk. mentally unbalanced, juvenile, disgruntled or a combination of these); 5% clumsy contractors carrying ladders etc; 2% idiot staff wondering if the alarm call points really do work like we showed them; 2% thieves who use the chaos of an alarm as cover to break out of the buildings unnoticed; and 1% disgruntled staff who missed out on a pay rise, etc.

T.

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #18 on: April 24, 2007, 09:12:18 AM »
I too, have really enjoyed the considered comments and thoughts surrounding this post and would like to add my own.

Would it be possible to consider having a 'double-knock' system so that it takes two devices to operate before immediate operation of alarm warning devices? In this scenario all the call points would be signed with a warning that operation of them does not do anything other than summon staff to investigate. Obviously there would be a delay timer before automatic operation of the alarm warning devices but also that the operation of a second detection device would cause immediate operation.

Vandals not knowing about the above 'double knock' operation scenario might then lose the temptation to operate any manual call points because it does not cause immediate evacuation.

Until something is done to make punishment for this sort of vandalism equal to the detrimental effect it has on society then there will always be problems of this sort. Also non-commercially minded persons shouldn't minimise the hoteliers complaint about false alarms due to vandalism impacting on their profits. This is a very serious issue to any business person. A solution must be found to this sort of problem otherwise some people might start considering dangerous short-cuts to protect their livlihood. Not being able to feed your family is a powerful force. This is something that people who receive their own pay solely through the taxation of others rarely consider when deciding on rules and regulations.

Also the idea of sprinklers fitted in a hotel that can't cope with 'false' operation of manual call points is scary! I can see a vandal really enjoying the damage and confusion that breaking a couple of sprinkler heads in a corridor would cause!

Offline Terry9

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #19 on: April 24, 2007, 09:13:09 AM »
Thanks by the way for all the comments. I put the post in for people to find flaws in the system.

I’ve been thinking about the behavioral side of this issue overnight. If I was in a hotel and discovered a fire, I would (hopefully) trot off following the fire exit signs to the nearest call point and raise the alarm. If next to the alarm was a fairly large sign that said in clear letters ‘you will not hear the alarm but security will have been called’ (or words to that effect) I might think it a bit odd, but like when I am at my local underground station, I would say to myself ‘I’ve done my bit’ and off I would go, relying on London Underground to have trained their staff.

Let’s say, on the other hand, I am a typical guest. I am Senor Lopez an elderly gent from Buenos Aires having just traveled across the Atlantic for the first time and have arrived in London where upon I have just sampled my first pint of British beer, eaten a plate of fish and chips and am now in deep jet-lag and alcohol induced sleep without having bothered reading the fire instructions in my bedroom, even though they are in Spanish, because I’ve lived to this ripe old age so far and have never had to know how to escape from a burning hotel before and doubt I will ever have to do so.

Who is actually going to discover the fire: Senor Lopez, or the smoke detector in or outside his room?

I think a lot of people get worked up about ‘sleeping risk’ that you need to have call points to raise the alarm quickly. This is probably because most hotels I’ve heard about have heat detectors in their bedrooms. We have smokes in our rooms because we realize that if a fire breaks out at night, the vast majority of people will actually be asleep and will know nothing about the fire. From our point of view, in the accommodation areas the first line of defence is the smoke detectors, an addressable panel, and a 24 hour fire team equipped with VHF radios.

When we have had incidents in the past (thankfully minor ones like a vacuum cleaner overheating) the speed in which our smoke detectors pick up the incident has always been faster than someone hitting a call point. A few years ago we had some Spanish kids setting fire to toilet rolls in their bedroom. That obviously activated the alarm in their bedroom and within seconds of them opening the bedroom door it activated a detector in the corridor and double-knocked the system. About a minute and a half later the first member of the fire team was on hand, picked up the burning toilet roll and dropped it into the bath tub and put the shower on. Three or four minutes after that the Brigade arrived having been brought out by the auto-dialler and confirmed everything was ok.

In the six years I have been involved in operating the systems we have here, never once have we been alerted to an incident by a call point actuation – it has always been through a detector activation.

By having a delay on the call point the worst thing that is going to happen is this. A businessman stays in the hotel on his own. He falls asleep with his cigarette in bed and sets fire to sheets. He leaps out, runs outside and heads for the fire exit where he finds a call point. The bedroom door closes behind him on the door closer and so no smoke goes into the corridor. By now in all probability, the smoke detector in his room would have activated, he now hits the call point and the system gets a double knock. Let’s say however, he gets to the call point first. He presses the button. Nothing happens. He is puzzled, but then sees the sign that says security are on their way. He stands there scratching his head for a few seconds more by which time the detector in the room picks up the smoke and sends the system into double knock. The hotel is tipped out etc etc etc. After the event, the businessman is downstairs at reception paying for the damage he has caused to the room by falling asleep smoking. Out of curiosity he asks the concierge why the alarm didn’t go when he pressed the button. The concierge, ably trained, says: “ah – but the alarm did go off down here – we heard it. Didn’t you see the sign that said the bells would not sound upstairs?” Businessman says ‘yes I did.’ “There you go then” says the smiling concierge.

One last thing. Come July we are banning smoking in all our bedrooms. We do not permit cooking facilities in the rooms either.

Now, does the delay on MCPs in public areas covered by smoke detectors sound unreasonable?

Terry

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #20 on: April 24, 2007, 09:37:04 AM »
Quote from: Wiz
Also the idea of sprinklers fitted in a hotel that can't cope with 'false' operation of manual call points is scary! I can see a vandal really enjoying the damage and confusion that breaking a couple of sprinkler heads in a corridor would cause!
The would not enjoy it at all.  They would be covered in a black stinking water first and would be easy to spot (water sitting in pipes gets pretty mucky).  Maybe because they are ceiling mounted, maybe because they are more difficult for the untrained eye to spot, malicious activation of sprinklers isn't really a problem in the UK.  Recessed sprinkler heads would most probably be used by a hotel for aesthetic reasons.

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2007, 11:20:14 AM »
Quote from: Chris Houston
Quote from: Wiz
Also the idea of sprinklers fitted in a hotel that can't cope with 'false' operation of manual call points is scary! I can see a vandal really enjoying the damage and confusion that breaking a couple of sprinkler heads in a corridor would cause!
The would not enjoy it at all.  They would be covered in a black stinking water first and would be easy to spot (water sitting in pipes gets pretty mucky).  Maybe because they are ceiling mounted, maybe because they are more difficult for the untrained eye to spot, malicious activation of sprinklers isn't really a problem in the UK.  Recessed sprinkler heads would most probably be used by a hotel for aesthetic reasons.
Good points Chris, but I would put good money on a bet that vandalism of sprinklers will become prevalent as their popularity increases in public buildings. It is only a matter of time. There will be millions of pounds of damage caused to schools, hotels etc etc once the vandals work out what a catastrophic effect vandalising sprinkler heads can have!

Offline wee brian

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2424
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2007, 11:21:51 AM »
Terry. I'm with you brother.

Although the reason people get so excited about sleeping risks is that they tend to be where people die in fires.

I still think a small buzzer or something in the MCP would be preferable but its not something I would lose sleep over.

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2007, 12:13:51 PM »
Quote from: Wiz
Good points Chris, but I would put good money on a bet that vandalism of sprinklers will become prevalent as their popularity increases in public buildings. It is only a matter of time. There will be millions of pounds of damage caused to schools, hotels etc etc once the vandals work out what a catastrophic effect vandalising sprinkler heads can have!
There are many hotels with sprinklers and about 400 schools with them.  Vandalism isn't a problem and it would cost more like hundreds of pounds, not millions should this occur.  Please note that even if someone broke one head, water would only come out there, an alarm would sound immediatly.

Offline Terry9

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2007, 01:19:52 PM »
I'd be very wary of putting sprinklers upstairs in the hotel as a flood caused by vandalism would be quite catastrophic and knock whole sections of the hotel out for weeks while the carpets were dried and the walls redecorated. It's bad enough with the hose reels being used for water fights between rival groups let alone a sprinkler-induced, biblical style flood.

Also, our biggest building is something like 85,000m2. Although the ground floor and below are sprinklered, I'd like to see the cost of putting a sprinkler system into the rest of the building and calcualte the loss in revenue while those floors were shut down for installtion work and redecoration. I don't think my bosses would go for that!

Terry

Offline kurnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6489
    • http://www.peakland-fire-safety.co.uk
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2007, 03:00:42 PM »
Terry
Do you keep records of the unwanted signals- including those investigated by staff without evacuation?
With 4500 detectors I would expect even a well maintained and designed system to give 90 unwanted signals per year. It would be interesting to know what the cause of these is, and whether you have any statistics on previous fires and what was involved, and whether the detectors worked.
If you have ionisation smoke detectors in rooms these tend  not to be sensitive to the smouldering fire such as one caused by smoking in bed.  
If vandalism is a problem , and if  you are to ban smoking in all rooms, is there a chance that persons wishing to have a crafty fag in the privacy of their own room may cover up the detector?
Personally I dont like the idea of a double knock with a combination of  automatic and manual call points. If I discover the fire but a smoke or heat detector has not- covered up or defective- I cant raise the alarm.

I can see the logic in having a low level local sounder and multi lingual sounds, and think this, or  voice communication of an alarm or tamperproof break glass call points with alarms may be the better answer.

Offline shaunmckeever

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2007, 03:27:21 PM »
Whilst not exactly the same I was involved in a site where there were a number of buildings used for student accommodation.  There was a big problem with false/malicious activations. In this particular case the fire brigade accepted removal of all the call points in the student blocks. This was despite my advice against removing them. The fire risk assessment flagged up the issue of detectors being covered, students wedging open fire doors to allow freedom of movement between bedrooms and the communal areas including kitchen, previous history of fires and students under the influence of drugs and alcohol. The insurers 'reluctantly' accepted the removal of the call points on the basis that all other avenues had been explored. I don't think all avenues were explored.  

The site did have 24 hour security and had a full management tean on during the day. They did try CCTV but this failed to solve the problem. They also tried the 'lift the flap' deterrent but this did not work either.

Admittedly the buildings were designed as flats much like any other block of flats. This was the basis for the fire brigade to accept the removal of MCP's.

I know it is not exactly the same but it does show that some fire authorities have gone that one step further and allowed full removal of MCP's against the advice given in the risk assessment.

Offline nearlythere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4351
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #27 on: April 25, 2007, 01:02:24 PM »
Shaun
Surely prior to removal of the MCPs a RA would have been carried out? Secondly, would you not consider that a risk assessment is undertaken to maintain an acceptable level of safety taking into consideration all of the circumstances? These circumstances would include specific issues relevant to the function of the property to include occupant behaviour.  
You would not ask for EODs on cell doors of prisons without firstly taking into consideration the function of the premises and the nature of the occupants. A prison must function as a place of enforced incarceration.
A normal fire alarm system incorporating MCP's in a place where there is a biosterous occupancy will be subject to abuse.
We're not Brazil we're Northern Ireland.

Offline Thebeardedyorkshireman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #28 on: April 25, 2007, 02:45:53 PM »
How about this for a solution.
programme the MCP's to day/night mode. Day mode is normal evac. night mode is the 5 min delay. Fit one Vesda per  200m of corridor / floor and cover the staircases and circulation routes away fron the public areas.
Time the vesda off during day mode and on maximum sensitivity at night. Vesda output is silent but starts the search.
Double knock the vesda and the callpoints at night.
Theory is: night time sleeping areas are covered with normal detection on delay. Fire in a room or corridor will detect and evac. Rooms are locked therefore vandals only have access to corridors and staircases. Early smoke will be detected by vesda before anybody needs to raise a manual alarm. If they beat the vesda then you dont have a fire problem yet but the MCP and the vesda will give you full instant evac on the double knock.
If you have false ceilings in the corridors then the installation price will be lower for the pipe and you dont need to worry about the size of the vesda zone. You are not trying to find the smoke source!! just to confirm that you have smoke somewhere will do!!
The model needs some work on it but I think it should fly as on the RA you are adding sensitivity and time as a trade of against the time delay on the MCP's
Dave
Dave

Offline Thebeardedyorkshireman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Delays on Manual Call Points
« Reply #29 on: April 25, 2007, 02:56:49 PM »
Should have added that in the public areas you have the MCP's on sounder evac. Should'nt be anybody sleeping here unless it's a Smiths concert. On the upper floors anybody investigating a Vesda alarm just hits a callpoint for instant evac.