FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Mushy on October 29, 2008, 08:13:09 AM
-
Hi
Can you tell me how you actually look at a premises and say what the category of risk is?
For example lets say you had a hotel or shop...anything really where the risk of fire itself was low-normal, pat test done, mains electrics checked, no ignition sources (apart from arson) or the sources were under control.... fire alarm system installed, E/L and FFE all ok and yet the housekeeping was a bag of spanners.....storage in the MOE corridors, combustible material left out, bins overflowing and fire doors wedged open or not closing properly...so the risk to people IF a fire did start was high
When you have completed your assessment what would the category be?
Ok if they sort out the bag of spanners I understand the risk will come down but I was thinking of your initial category
-
By category - do you mean Low/Normal/ high?
They are meaningless terms used to bamboozle people.
They only mean anything when compared to something else.
-
By category - do you mean Low/Normal/ high?
They are meaningless terms used to bamboozle people.
They only mean anything when compared to something else.
Here here
-
Have a look at BS 8800 appendic e on risk assessment, it may help you.
-
By category - do you mean Low/Normal/ high?
They are meaningless terms used to bamboozle people.
They only mean anything when compared to something else.
Yes that's what I meant...I remember a fire safety officer told me when I was in the job that he we on a Colin Todd course at Bristol and that's what they did ie High, Medium/Normal and Low and it was a matrix type system...or is my memory playing tricks
-
That's a way of comparing relative risks. It breaks down risk into it's two components; Probability and Consequence (there are different words but they mean the same thing).
If its unlikely to happen and the consequence is insignificant then the risk sits as low as you can go. If its definately going to happen and when it does we are all going to die a nasty death then risk is very high.
Unless you have proper probability figures then it's just a way of tidying up the way you think. This is a good thing but dont confuse it with any kind of science.
-
Brian, he referred to a "course". I like to think of it as a learning experience. Course is such an understatement dont you think.
-
cheers wee brian...
I wouldn't have thought an assessor would need a numbers matrix system...looking round the place and management procedures would give them a feel for the risk I would have thought....but if you had to nail it, there was no ignition sources to talk about and the place was a mess with the scenario I mentioned in my above post...I was just wondering how anyone would class it
It couldn't be a high risk of fire if there wasn't any ignition sources or the ignition sources were controlled...but it would be a high risk to people if a fire did start...say arson
-
Brian, he referred to a "course". I like to think of it as a learning experience. Course is such an understatement dont you think.
sorry Colin...a learning experience it is then
;)
-
ps
Colin any reply to my dorguard question on the guest house thread? Ta
-
It is a Cat B under BS 7273-4. That then helps define where it might be used. Whether you then want to use it or not is a matter of personal taste..
-
Mushy there are two different aspects to this assessment of risk.
Theres the matrix based evaluation of risk for a particular hazard as others have pointed out. But then theres a historic overal assessment of risk for the building - traditionally expressed as high medium and low. This is applied to factories and warehouses in respect of contents and processes - or it could be applied to all building- eg a wooden building is clearly a higher fire risk than a concrete one.
The logic is simple- high risk buildings may burn more quickly than low risk buildings, or the fire may develop at a fast rate so you have a shorter time in which to evacuate in safety. So this has a consequent effect on how far you should have to travel to reach an exit, and in a combustible marquee for example how wide the exits are because we need to get people out more quickly.
The fire risk assessment guides for factories and warehouses have different travel distances for each risk category, so if carrying out a risk assessment it will be necessary to record which category you have applied.
-
Thanks Kurnal
the second risk assessment type is similar to what we used to do as crews when carrying out 'Tactical Plans' for weight of attack of a building
The first one...the matrix is what in fact I mentioned in my post above...but I still can't get my head round how you would class, say a sleeping risk (hotel) if all ignition sources were under control so low risk of fire but the housekeeping was crap with doors wedged open...after all it is a 'Fire Risk' Assessment
When you produce your document haven't you got to put what risk the place is at the time of inspection?
Colin...you said Dorgaurd should not be used on staircases...is that your personal view or is that in the documents that have been mentioned?
ps...just noticed Dorguards blurb
Part of this Fire Risk Assessment includes ensuring that workers can
escape safely in the event of a fire. This may include protecting corridors and
stairways with self-closing fire doors, which are often wedged open illegally.
Dorgard offers a cost-effective wireless solution for any environment to safely and legally retain fire doors open in any position. When a fire alarm sounds, Dorgard allows fire doors to release and close automatically.
-
I didnt. I said staircases in sleeping risks (and single staircase condtions). Answer is both since I drafted the document.
-
and that was my question in the other thread colin..here
"This hotel that I stayed in the other weekend had a Dorgard keeping the fire door open at the head of it's accommodation staircase that was open on the ground floor but protecting the bedroom corridor on the first floor (alternative protected stairway at the other end)
The hotel had a very recently installed L2 system
Can you show me where this info can be found that says it's not acceptable Colin
Thanks"
-
It doest say not accpetable. Just gives braoad implication. BS 7273-4 Annex A
-
"Category B are not regarded as suitable for all applications, such as staircases in sleeping risks."
sorry Colin as you said Dorguard was Category B your above post threw me a bit...I'll check the broad implications out
-
Mushy it is down to the responsible Persons assessment of risk. The BS gives some benchmark guidance. All it is saying is that some methods of holding open a fire door are more reliable, more resilient and give a faster response than other methods. Some buildings and situations are higher risk than others. If you had a four storey hotel with a single staircase and a kitchen door opening into the bottom of the staircase you need to be very careful about what you do with that kitchen door. Especially as there is only likely to be a heat detector in the kitchen so no device- whether it is a swing free closer or magnet is likely to be any better in that situation.
On the other hand in a different building say of less height or with additional staircases you may be a bit more relaxed about it. The dorgard is a good bit of kit but it isnt as resilient or durable as a swing free closer or a magnet. But it can be more flexible ( it can be programmed not to hold the door open at night so has an element of failsafe there), is a lot cheaper and needs no wires. So using a dorgard my fall outside the broad guidance of the BS but may actually result in a fire safety solution that reduces the level of fire risk as low as is reasonably practicable.
Hope this drivel helps.
-
Thanks for taking the time to answer Kurnal it's appreciated
I've just dug a CACFOA paper written on March 2003 (google is good!) which says similar to what has been stated on here ie Dorguard should not 'normally' be used for single staircases and other critical means of escape...surprisingly it does not mention sleeping risk.
My hotel manager friend has this device on an accommodation stair leading to bedrooms...the corridor has another means of escape but you have to bypass this door to get to it so in effect there is only one means of escape stair (which is an external) so I'm thinking it shouldn't be on there
anyway thanks all for your patience
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/efd/maintenance/fire/documents/UCLFire_TN_016.pdf
-
Mushy that document is just the University of London's own internal policy on these things. Thats probably why they dont mention sleeping risks.
I have recommended dorgards in several hotels having considered the pros and cons and the circumstances of the case. I cant comment on your friends situation without seeing it other than to say if they have smoke detection at the bottom of the stairs, if the nature of the building is such that smoke will not cut off the means of escape in the incipient stages of the fire before the alarm has operated and the doors closed, if the dorgard is set to shut the door at night when people are asleep it could be ok and better than a magnet or swing free that may well be open 24/7
-
Just a thought on door releasing devices, consider the possibility of it releasing on timer switch and hitting someone, I seem to remember reading of an elderly person being killed in such a way.
-
Mushy that document is just the University of London's own internal policy on these things. Thats probably why they dont mention sleeping risks.
I have recommended dorgards in several hotels having considered the pros and cons and the circumstances of the case. I cant comment on your friends situation without seeing it other than to say if they have smoke detection at the bottom of the stairs, if the nature of the building is such that smoke will not cut off the means of escape in the incipient stages of the fire before the alarm has operated and the doors closed, if the dorgard is set to shut the door at night when people are asleep it could be ok and better than a magnet or swing free that may well be open 24/7
Hi Kurnal
If you scroll down on that link it gives CACFOA's general recommendations on dorgard and magnets. One problem I suppose is if the fire alarm fails for any reason, although as you say if the door is shut at night that wouldn't matter in relation to the device
-
Just a thought on door releasing devices, consider the possibility of it releasing on timer switch and hitting someone, I seem to remember reading of an elderly person being killed in such a way.
It was actually a magnet. Dorguard is the only retainer to have a delay and an audible/visual warning before it closes.
At the end of the day they seem to work, its a simple bit of kit but it does the job. I would always have on night time release, if the batteries run out it closes itself so wheres the harm in using it? If the only argument is that what if the fire alarm/sounder fails well 1. it should have an alternative power supply. 2. Whats the chance of that actually happening? 3. If the power supply fails to a magnet it doesn't necessarily fail to safe (talk to a sparky you would be surprised).
-
Typical CACFOA vagueness. "Dorgards should not be used to protect single stairways or protecting other critical means of escape."
Are all means of escape not critical?
-
Typical CACFOA vagueness. "Dorgards should not be used to protect single stairways or protecting other critical means of escape."
Are all means of escape not critical?
"Not Normally" !! even more help!
-
Mushy
Regarding your friends hotel and dorgard devices, there is a radio-interlinked fire door retainer on the market wire free that conforms to the highest standard Cat A of BS 7273-4, available from the sponser of Firenet -Safelinks, Its up to the fire risk assessor to inform the responsible person of the safest solution for the premises, bearing in mind it's a sleeping risk. Probably in hindsight this should have been sorted when the L2 fire alarm system was recently installed, although hindsight is a wonderful thing and very hard to obtain, If it's on sale anywhere please let me know..
-
hindsight is a wonderful thing and very hard to obtain, If it's on sale anywhere please let me know..
Cant do hindsight but can offer you a good price for a little bit of forsight mixed with a pinch of sad reflection served at the bar with equal measures of cynicism and experience shaken but not stirred, whipped but never beaten.
Please form an orderly queue.
My Uncle also had forsight- he had a crystal ball and could see himself coming.
-
The old CACFOA advice is now obsolete. It is possible to argue until the cows come home but the recognized national guidance is in BS 7273-4. Of course, its only a code of practice, and people can ignore it if they wish. A court may not be quite so dismissive of guidance produced as a national consensus of all stakeholders including regualtors and enforcers as well as the industry.
-
The old CACFOA advice is now obsolete. It is possible to argue until the cows come home but the recognized national guidance is in BS 7273-4. Of course, its only a code of practice, and people can ignore it if they wish. A court may not be quite so dismissive of guidance produced as a national consensus of all stakeholders including regualtors and enforcers as well as the industry.
Of course it isn't CACFOA any more. Assistant Chiefs have been kicked off the Association. It is now CFOA.
-
Just a thought on door releasing devices, consider the possibility of it releasing on timer switch and hitting someone, I seem to remember reading of an elderly person being killed in such a way.
Bungle- would you not say that this unfortunate person was the victim of a maladjusted or inappropriate door closer rather than the electromagnetic door release?
We see it all the time- spring loaded saloon type hinges on double swing fire doors in care homes and hydraulics that are wrongly adjusted so they shake the place to pieces as they slam the door. Two minutes is all it takes to adjust them to close the door in a controlled but gentle manner.
-
The old CACFOA advice is now obsolete. It is possible to argue until the cows come home but the recognized national guidance is in BS 7273-4. Of course, its only a code of practice, and people can ignore it if they wish. A court may not be quite so dismissive of guidance produced as a national consensus of all stakeholders including regualtors and enforcers as well as the industry.
Quite right Colin. But dare I point out that you are starting to sound a little like a fire officer in your advancing years? Its never too late to join, and you could go far provided you remember to take a double dose of the PC tablets.
-
Nearly, I know its called CFOA now . Thats why I referred to it as the old CACFOA guidance as thats what it was at the time. Kurnal, Sadly, the child support payments could not be supported by the drop in salary, nor if i were to join the Messeys, could I afford the amount of chewing gum that appears to be a compulsory accessory.