FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Mike Buckley on January 18, 2011, 01:38:24 PM
-
This question is not related to any particular permise or incident just as a thought I had.
Does the team think there is a need to individually test the "Green Boxes" which release electronically locked doors in the same way that MCPs are tested?
All I have found is in BS 5588 pt 12.
"L.4.7 Automatic opening doors
The operation of fail-safe mechanisms should be tested once a month, either by “breaking-out” the doorset
or by simulating failure of the mains power supply, as appropriate. The results of the test should be
recorded. Any doors that are found to be faulty should be repaired or replaced."
(Candidates should not attempt to write on both sides of the paper at the same time)
-
Yes. Although not very often
-
Commonsense suggests that anything on which reliance is expected in safety situations needs to be tested for correct operation on a regular basis.
BS7273-4 Clause 22.3 a) recommends that the Emergency Door Release switch (green box) is tested at least once in a twelve month period.
My own opinion is that because the EDR is the ultimate safety device on a system (if all other controls fail, operation of it should always be able to allow emergency access through the door) it should therefore be tested as regularly as possible. A twelve month testing cycle seems far too long to me.
-
Hi Mike
Brief answer is yes they certainly need to be tested, because you need to be confident that when required, the units will work.
Monthly tests sound reasonable, but again it does depend upon the location and MOE arrangements, and if it is a relatively small premsies, and BGUs are located by every MCP, then why not test them weekly along with the MCPs as a matter of course?
-
BS7273 Section 22 recommends that user checks are carried out weekly.
-
BS7273 Section 22 recommends that user checks are carried out weekly.
N.T., your post makes my earlier answer to appear to be wrong!
However, the bit in BS you are referring to only recommends that the door release mechanism is tested with a fire signal weekly. The original question was about testing the 'green boxes' not the door release mechanisms.
Please do not confuse the issue by quoting recommendations that are not precisely applicable to the question!
-
Yes I have to concur with Wiz - basically the release mechanisms are checked when the manual call points are tested weekly
-
Wiz,
is it true then that you are becoming an expert on 7273 part 4 as well as Mr Todd?
-
Question was:-
"Does the team think there is a need to individually test the "Green Boxes" which release electronically locked doors in the same way that MCPs are tested?
In your reply you seem to be suggesting that green boxes are tested to see if they work, not that they release the securing device? How do you do that without the device operating? How can you tell they work unless they do what they are suppose to do?
Same way that how can you tell the MCP is working unless it performs the function for which it intended, ie sound the alarm.
Do you think that the question only related to the working of the box, not what it does?
Does 22.1.2 not imply that the purpose of the test is to check the working of the release mechanism, weekly?
But maybe I am wrong and you are always right.
-
Yes I have to concur with Wiz - basically the release mechanisms are checked when the manual call points are tested weekly
But then you are also much more civilised and mannered in your response.
-
The question was specifically about the boxes. The actual door releases are usually tested during the weekly fire alarm test, a MCP is tested the alarm goes off and people ensure that the doors unlock. I raised the question as to whether there was a test routine for the actual box to that it would operate independantly of the alarm. Afterall the aim of the box is to release the door, if it fails to release with the alarm. As such I feel it should be tested independantly and the results recorded.
-
I do agree however I think the little green buggers should be the same make as the red buggers , lot of sites where i go to are happy with the kac type , thats kiddeminster alarm company for all us old uns, but some of these green releases can be a nightmare even for an engineer - just thought i would throw that into the ring.
-
They do need testing for sure. I once put a test key in one and not only didn't it release the door lock, it isolated the normal 'Push to exit' button as well so that wouldn't work either!
Fortunately I just removed the key but in a real emergency if the glass had been broken everyone would be trapped.
Sadly every week a different make of call point box seems to appear and I need to chase down and 'aquire' another different reset/test key....
Oh for the days you could get away with carrying just KAC, Gent & Menvier plastic keys, an Allen key, triangle key and screwdriver and this test/reset/replace glass in 99% of call points.
I now carry well over a dozen MCP & EL test keys (plus the Allen key, triangle key and screwdriver) and still need to find more different ones....
-
Wiz,
is it true then that you are becoming an expert on 7273 part 4 as well as Mr Todd?
No Jokar, but I had to read it to form the negative opinions I have about it!
However, obviously, even I can understand some of it.
-
The question was specifically about the boxes. The actual door releases are usually tested during the weekly fire alarm test, a MCP is tested the alarm goes off and people ensure that the doors unlock. I raised the question as to whether there was a test routine for the actual box to that it would operate independantly of the alarm. Afterall the aim of the box is to release the door, if it fails to release with the alarm. As such I feel it should be tested independantly and the results recorded.
So I did answer your question correctly and precisely, Mike. I wouldn't want to quote BS recommendations which are not strictly relevant.
The only recommendation in BS7273-4 for testing the Emergency Door Release switch (green box) is that it is carried out every year. The weekly test recommendation only mentions using a fire alarm signal to ensure the door release mechanism operates and has no mention of the EDR.
Personally, I feel that once a year is nowhere near often enough for such an important part of the system.
Interestingly, the weekly test is under the heading of Routine Testing, whilst the annual testing of EDRs is under the heading Inspection and Testing. With the latter being carried out by a 'competent' person.
I can't see why the Routine Testing (presumably carried out by premises staff) shouldn't include the EDR, so that it is tested weekly. But this is only my opinion and not the BS recommendation. They obviously don't consider the EDR as important as the other equipment on the fire signal path in ensuring the correct operation of the door release mechanism.
-
Wiz. Should you think that I, or anyone else for that matter, made a point which you considered went against your understanding, or indeed comprehensive knowledge of the subject, please feel free to say so in a more mannerdly and civil fashion. I am always willing to learn from the learned.
But should you feel it appropriate to use smary remarks to make your point I can only conclude that by doing so reflects the type of person you really are.
-
I agree . Wiz is quick to have a pop at others yet he should consider his own responses first.
-
Wiz. Should you think that I, or anyone else for that matter, made a point which you considered went against your understanding, or indeed comprehensive knowledge of the subject, please feel free to say so in a more mannerdly and civil fashion. I am always willing to learn from the learned.
But should you feel it appropriate to use smary remarks to make your point I can only conclude that by doing so reflects the type of person you really are.
Nearlythere, my original comment was made somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I did say please and I did use an exclamation mark. Maybe if I'd used a smiley, then your toys would still be in your pram. ;)
I maintain that your original post wasn't relative to the original question asked, and could, in fact, have caused confusion to those seeking the right answer. It was a waste of everyone's time.
Obviously, my response touched a nerve with you, and so, if I upset you, then I apologise if you were offended.
However, your subsequent personal comments about me do not show you in a good light and, quite frankly, I have absolutely no interest in what you think about me. Why should I? But it was funny that you woke up Gollum again from his stupor!
-
Under F&RS equality and diversity policies, Gollum would be eligible to be a CFO, so dont knock the little chap.
On a point of accuracy, it is quite simple.You test the fire alarm interface each week. You test the BGU every year. We did not consider more frequent testing to be ncessary. The green BGU will comply with BS EN 54-11 and should be quite reliable. How often does the microswitch fail?
Test it more frequently if you want to create work, but for there to be people at risk, you need a fire and a failure of the fire alarm interface AND failure of the green breakglass.
Wee B (who is the only English civil servant since the time of Henry VIII, who talks any sense) has tried to tell you all before that you dont need to wear a crash helmet when you drive a car, but if it floats your boat to do so, well go for it.
-
A point that maybe worth considering, as different MCP is tested each week therefore depending how many there are will dictate the frequency of test, 4 would be monthly and so on.
As for EDR, would you need to simulate a fault on the FA system to test it under the proposed operational conditions. Therefore would not the annual test be the the most appropriate time to to test them with all the MCP's.
-
Thomas , thanks for the idea but I am happy that there is no need. Just comply with BS 7273-4 and all will be well.
-
I agree with you completely as well your previous explanation but I am from a bygone age (prescriptive age) and accept those things at face value. These risk assessment days they say you need to look a lot deeper for the reasons for it and as is said quite often BS's are said to be only recommendations.