FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Technical Advice => Topic started by: David Rooney on June 06, 2006, 04:22:33 PM
-
We've been asked to install a system and the usual "consultant's" spec says to install xenon beacon in areas to "satisfy" the DDA.
Being your average 6 storey London office block, we would normally install beacons simply in toilets/rest rooms etc.
But to satisy the DDA should we really install beacons throughout, including the open plan floor areas, as well as plant rooms/ lift motor rooms etc, in case a deaf engineer is employed ?
Surely it's down the the "consultant" to provide a DDA policy and tell us where he wants the beacons ??
-
My personal opinion is that it would be acceptable to install beacons only where people with hearing difficulties currently work and where they may be alone. A system of providing visitors with hearing difficulties with vibrating equipment could be used in addition to this.
Even people with no hearing will see everyone else respond to a fire alarm.
And I agree that it's the consultant's role to advise the installer about this.
-
DDA is about being reasonable. It is reasonable to assume that when updateing, as I assume you are, the FA system in the premises that thought is given to users who may have hearing and visual impairment. Tha answer of course is yes, but where and when is a difficult issue. People with disabilities should have Personal Evacuation Plans dependent on their disability and their location within the premises. Being reasonable is speaking to each individual about their needs, if there are no hearing impaired persons within the premises why bother and if it is acase of visitors then they should have a host. Providing there is a sound robust evacuation plan there may be no need to do more.
-
Thanks men, it seems to make sense.
It just niggles that these "consultants" who write the specs never actually tell you anything more than the bloody obvious, charge a fortune and then blame everyone else when things don't comply by using the Holy get out, "I advised you to make it comply with the regulations.... !"
No, just me then !
-
The DDA asks that all with hearing problems are made as much aware of the fire alarm as normal hearing people.
So if you install visuals in toilets only where you think deaf people may be alone,this still discriminates as they could be anywhere in the building alone.
If you put one beacon in a toilet to satisfy the DDA then you will have to install them every where to comply.
The consultants draft seems like a "cop out" and has passed the buck onto you.
-
Fortunately with LED technology it is easy to incorporate visual warnings in detector bases (just like is now commonplace with sounders) so it is easier to install them throughout a building (if it has L1 which seems to be more & more common) with cost being limited to the devices themselves usually.
If someone asked for a DDA compliant system, then just as a whole building must comply with part M for disabled access, I would expect the whole fire alarm to comply as well.
Of course you could risk assess - a publically accessible building may well need visual devices throughout, but in some buildings, where only staff & some vistors will resort, fire alarm vibrating pagers are issued to the actual hearing impaired employees
-
And what about the individuals personal evacuation plan?
Surely this must play a part in deciding what level of alarm warning is needed in terms of audible/visual?
Can you operate a buddy system?
Are members of the public allowed access to this office?
Requirements should be based on the outcomes of the Fire Risk Assessment.
-
Fortunately with LED technology it is easy to incorporate visual warnings in detector bases (just like is now commonplace with sounders) so it is easier to install them throughout a building (if it has L1 which seems to be more & more common) with cost being limited to the devices themselves usually.
If someone asked for a DDA compliant system, then just as a whole building must comply with part M for disabled access, I would expect the whole fire alarm to comply as well.
Of course you could risk assess - a publically accessible building may well need visual devices throughout, but in some buildings, where only staff & some vistors will resort, fire alarm vibrating pagers are issued to the actual hearing impaired employees
agree. Pagers are another option other than beacons everywhere and not all buildings require them.
-
Public buildings are throughout.
As a side question - why do sparkies and consultants put beacons in the disabled toilets only?? Unless the person with impaired hearing also has a physical disability then they're going to use the male or female loo!Muppets!!
-
I work for an organisation that has a higher than average number of employees with hearing impairments (and other disabilities) and we occupy two floors in a 20 odd floor office block. We did have beacons co-located with all the fire alarm sounders until a few months ago when the system was upgraded to a voice announcement system. Following this, we switched to pagers for those staff as it enabled them to differentiate between the 'standby', 'evacuate' and 'non-fire evacuate' messages, something the beacons never did.
We have a small pool of spare pagers for use by visitors, who although usually are escorted, may be alone when using the toilets for example.
As everyone has mentionioned earlier, the DDA only requires reasonable adjustments and for organisations with fewer resources the buddy system and escorting for visitors should be adequate.
-
Just a thing on the pagers, most women do not have pockets to carry them about and put them with thier other devices in their handbags which they may or may not have with them at all times. Also, some women have pagers of their own, which is the most iomportant and can you have a normal pager realigned for the fire alarm system? Thats why PEEP's are so important, it takees account of the individual and the Company.
-
Fortunately with LED technology it is easy to incorporate visual warnings in detector bases (just like is now commonplace with sounders) so it is easier to install them throughout a building (if it has L1 which seems to be more & more common) with cost being limited to the devices themselves usually.
If someone asked for a DDA compliant system, then just as a whole building must comply with part M for disabled access, I would expect the whole fire alarm to comply as well.
Of course you could risk assess - a publically accessible building may well need visual devices throughout, but in some buildings, where only staff & some vistors will resort, fire alarm vibrating pagers are issued to the actual hearing impaired employees
But I thought the "DDA" requirements for beacons meant they need to be fitted on walls, therefore not necessarily so easy to add onto a detector base.
Also thought there was a minimum illuminescence which LED beacons don't always meet ??
-
Point to note.
There are no specific technical requirements in the DDA. It is not possible to specify a system that complies with Act.
As has been said, all you can do is what is reasonable. One way to demonstarte this is to use a recognised book of words. BS 5839 Part 1 says something along the lines of put them in places where people may work alone etc.
It's a bit open to interpretation but its better than nowt.
B
-
Just a point on pagers for the DDA. This is our view:
As a general principle, fire alarm sounder transmission circuits and their associated power supplies are fault monitored and provide a warning in the event that the sound will not be given ( yes I know that the noise is not allways monitored). If you provide a pager warning for a disabled person then you are discriminating against them if their warning does not have the same integrity. Thus the radio signal must be monitored and provide warning if they 'wander' out of range or have a signal degregation.
The battery must be monitored to the same standard as that which provides the general fire warning.
Any views?
-
http://www.deaf-alerter.com/website.htm
-
Hi Graeme
Yes I know the product but does it FULLY comply, despite what the blurb says?
Dave
-
http://www.deaf-alerter.com/website.htm
Things may have changed with deaf alerter but a couple of years ago when we looked into them they didn't comply fully (as claimed) with BS.
I can't find the old paperwork but I think it was to do with the fact they didn't indicate a failure of the transmission equipment on the pager.
"18.2.2 f) A failure of the interconnection (e.g. radio transmission) between the control and indicating equipment
and the portable alarm device should be identified at the portable alarm device by a visual and tactile
signal within five minutes of the failure."
As I recall, their original plan for world domination was to sell pagers to deaf people and transmitters to all the shops in the highstreet, therefore "one personal pager" fits all. For all sorts of reasonably obvious reasons this couldn't work.
When I spoke to their marketing people they implied the monitoring part should be considered as a "variation" although it wasn't written down anywhere.
As I said, don't know if they ever changed...... (all allegedly of course....)
The only one I found to comply was the Scope system (and a lot cheaper !)
-
i am going on their say so as a yes Dave but Mr Rooney has made me want to ask again.
I will let you know.
G
Mr Rooney-have you used scope before for this application?
-
I suspect you may be correct Mr R
from their site it says that the transmitter unit is battery backed up to meet the capacity requirements of 5839 but nothing else mentioned.
Scope meet all the rquirements of 5839 as a means of alerting deaf people but maybe not the DDA as what about the short time in say a hotel when a deaf person may take out his hearing aids for a shower.You would then need visual alarms also.
you could take this way too far i suppose.What about when a deaf person is in the shower.
He/she could not take the Deaf Alerter cradle with beacon in as it's plugged in, or the pager unless he clips it somewhere sore.
-
I suspect you may be correct Mr R
Scope meet all the rquirements of 5839 as a means of alerting deaf people but maybe not the DDA as what about the short time in say a hotel when a deaf person may take out his hearing aids for a shower.You would then need visual alarms also.
you could take this way too far i suppose.What about when a deaf person is in the shower.
He/she could not take the Deaf Alerter cradle with beacon in as it's plugged in, or the pager unless he clips it somewhere sore.
Talking to Scope their unit seemed to me to be the better option.
I think the shower room scenario is taking it a bit too far, although you could have vibrating ear muffs under your shower cap...?!
Have you played with that "EMS/DoorGuard" collaboration, the alarm unit that sits on the bedside cabinet, listening out for the fire alarm (like the doorguard) and operates a vibrating under pillow pad.
I'm not sure what this does or does not comply with as it's not "radio" controlled, it doesn't seem to come under 5839...?
-
never seen it David but never been a fan of devices that listen for the alarm.
What about connecting a pulsing relay to the shower pump so the water stop/starts when the fire alarm goes off?
i could make millions.(not)
-
never seen it David but never been a fan of devices that listen for the alarm.
What about connecting a pulsing relay to the shower pump so the water stop/starts when the fire alarm goes off?
i could make millions.(not)
Far better to shutdown the hot tap.... that'll encourage 'em to get out!
-
Graeme/Dave
Just to pick up the thread again, what about scope, does it comply on the battery side?
That used to be the problem.
Dave
You could argue that they are relatively safe whilst under the water deluge system anyway.
-
Graeme/Dave
Dave
You could argue that they are relatively safe whilst under the water deluge system anyway.
Not where I live, they want us to install a timer to limit showers to 5 minutes !!!
As far as I recall, the scope system complies - must admit I wasn't aware of and don't recall a battery problem....?
-
Graeme/Dave
Just to pick up the thread again, what about scope, does it comply on the battery side?
That used to be the problem.
Dave
You could argue that they are relatively safe whilst under the water deluge system anyway.
just spoke to them today and they have a fully compliant system to 5839.
If you install this in a hotel though you will still need visual and tactile alarms in the bedrooms for DDA.
The pagers alone are fine for a workplace.
-
here's a link Dave
http://www.scope-uk.com/pdfs/pagetek_pro.pdf
-
Point to note.
There are no specific technical requirements in the DDA. It is not possible to specify a system that complies with Act.
As has been said, all you can do is what is reasonable. One way to demonstarte this is to use a recognised book of words. BS 5839 Part 1 says something along the lines of put them in places where people may work alone etc.
It's a bit open to interpretation but its better than nowt.
B
5839 like you say Brian mentions that bulidings with a large propotion of deaf people working that tend to move around or work in isolation then additional means of warning may be needed.
or if the deaf poeple in that building spend most of the time in one place then install visuals in that place along with the associated toilets.
but again how can you be certian that they are going to spend all their time in one area?
easiest way is to give them a pager rather than install visuals where they might or might not go,than there can be no arguments.
-
I think the code is saying - do what is reasonable, don't go OTT.
You cant cater for every eventuallity.
pagers have their limitations, for instance, in public buildings where there is no control over people coming and going. (I wonder how many get stolen?)
-
I think the code is saying - do what is reasonable, don't go OTT.
You cant cater for every eventuallity.
pagers have their limitations, for instance, in public buildings where there is no control over people coming and going. (I wonder how many get stolen?)
I wish that the consultant who designed the system sitting in front of me nolw had read this post - flamin' sounder/beacon bases everywhere (ceiling height is 6 metres in some places!).
-
It will be like an illegal rave when the fire alarm goes off Buzz.
Fire in the disco!!!
-
This is the problem with open ended legislation like the DDA. Some people, worried about compliance, will do far too much. Everybody else gets away with doing nothing.
-
This is the problem with open ended legislation like the DDA. Some people, worried about compliance, will do far too much. Everybody else gets away with doing nothing.
I think this is the problem generally with most of the regulation that's put out now, having moved away from prescriptive towards risk assessment, it's all open to interpretation, and doesn't get sorted until you got to court. Then, by default you end up back with a prescriptive measure as everyone then does the minimum the judge advocates!!
...... got the link G thanks....