FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: nearlythere on March 02, 2011, 08:54:26 AM
-
Can anyone post the link to the website where you can design and download your own signage please?
-
What are you after Nearlythere Fire Action Notices?
-
http://www.online-sign.com/
If that doesn't work, try their new Beta http://www.online-sign.com/os7/
-
Thanks AB
-
I am so sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the website sign designs recommended by Anthony do not conform to even the basics of safety sign design to conform to appropriate Standards. Does it matter? All the technical work on comprehension, conspicuity, relevance to persons with literacy or dyslexia? Obviously not. I have expressed this for 20 years and I am still a voice in the wilderness.
-
I may have provided the link, but where did I say "It's really good, go and do all your signs there for free!"?
I'd rather a pictographic sign from there than none at all or some poor hand written job which you see in smaller concerns.
Oh and just one more word .......... Everlux! *
* those who saw the episode Sense and Senility, the 4th of Blackadder the Third, will get the reference.....
-
I was just making the point that the graphical symbols on the site you recommended do not conform to the appropriate Standards. I also made the point that I don't think many people care, however on a technical issue the hand written job could be more effective than using a graphical symbol of poor design, which incidently is an offence under The Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996.
On a constructive note I am glad to announce that the Health and Safety Sign Association has announced the full adoption of ISO 7010 as the new Standard for Safety Signs all members are withdrawing the so called Euro Signs from all their standard catalogue ranges. ISO 7010 is in the process of being adopted as a European Norm and the confusing annex to EC Directive is to be withdrawn.
As for the reference to Everlux I am not sure what I am to make of that.? Would you like me to comment on their designs? I have heard that they don't even bother with the colour yellow on hazard signs can you confirm this?
-
Jim,
does this mean that the Euro sign as installed will now become illegal? Most of the Internally illuminated exit signs have these as you are aware this could be a huge cost burden.
-
Everlux do not use yellow (they would argue the base material is yellow enough even though it isn't by any stretch of the imagination the proper yellow) as if they printed black on yellow on photoluminescent you would only see the outline of the sign in the dark and no writing or symbol.
Their stuff is popular with the trade as it is cheap (even cheaper stuff has emerged recently too under the Titan brand).
However it can't compete with Jalite AAA in performance. I have a fire door with a Jalite AAA Fire door keep shut sign an Everlux 'beware of the drop' warning pictogram next to each other and the difference with the lights off is amazing.
Existing Euro signs won't become illegal overnight although many in the trade (& many safety officers who easily have the wool pulled over their eyes) will try and say different to rake in the cash.
Good luck in getting ICEL and it's members and most of China in changing their Exit Box fascias, it's been tried before!
-
In my humble opinion nothing is illegal anymore you can use recycled washing up water in buckets as an alterrnative extinguisher if you want to, it is for professionals, competent people and ultimately the Responsible Person to deem that any provision is an appropriate measure. If a risk assessment shows that fire safety signs are an appropriate measure then in my opinion they should conform to a recognised standard.
I think it would be appropriate to remove all the signs rather than have signs that are not understood and can mislead and delay egress.
A risk assessor must decide whether the use of Euro Signs are a significant finding, knowing that they have no comprehension credentials, are likely to confuse is pretty damning for means of escape provision. It is for the risk assessor to decide.
-
Jim - it's gopod news if there is only one type of pictogram on the market. Has this been taken up by the peopl that do emergency lighting too? You often find the ELs with horrible Eurosigns stuck on them in buildings using the ISO pictogram on all the other signs. (it's just a bit pants)
-
To be fair to ICEL and LIF they sent a letter to all members years ago outlining the risks of using the Euro Symbol. They felt the technical case and obvious liability so great that they were compelled to withdraw technical support for the Euro Symbol. The technical Committee has been waiting for enforcement authorities to sort it out.
There is no excuse now....it is upto the risk assessor.
-
They may well have, but the entire EL industry has ignored it and no doubt will continue to do so particularly as Building Control & enforcing authorities don't give a fig, nor do most customers.
If the EL industry do finally change then it's a case of phased introduction like with red extinguishers unless a new regulation is brought in - I'm not making clients with fittings that could be less than a year old change fascias overnight unless info4fire starts publishing loads of prosecutions for 'wrong running men'.
Even when a regulation did change signage in '96 they still allowed 2 years grace to upgrade.
-
In 1996 we still had prescriptive legislation and code based enforcement so it was pertinent to give 2 years to phase implementation. Not only that the prescriptive regime that existed was as good as! and with hindsight better than that which was implemented with EC Directive 92/58.
I do agree that the EL industry has a lot to answer for the confusion and it is why I have consisently said that fire safety signs should not be considered as part of an emergengency lighting system.
The situation is quite different now, using graphical symbols that we know are likely to be misunderstood, likely to be ignored, likely to reduce ASET requires risk assessors to note as a significant finding and recommend replacement schedule. This schedule should be appropriate to the purpose group of the building, in some cases it might well be appropriate to just remove all the signs, if the building layout is very familiar to all occupants, however in public buildings and hotels I believe replacement should be a much shorter time scale.
-
I hope this isn't a really stupid question, but what (if any) is the relationship between ISO 7010 and BS ISO 16069:2004?
-
ISO 7010 is the international standard for fire signs and its been combined with BS 5499: Part 1 the result is BS ISO 16069:2004. At the moment Europe is in the process of adopting ISO 7010 as a European norm which means we will all be singing from the same hymn sheet. I think!
Jim has it been made a European norm (PR EN 7010) yet?
Check out http://www.firesafe.org.uk/html/fsequip/firesign1.htm any complaints send it to Safelincs
-
Nearly right but just for the record.... BS ISO 16069 2004 Graphical Symbols Safety Signs and Safety Wayguidance Systems(SWGS) a document that outlines possible components for low proximity illumination and escape route location, identification and direction. A Standard born out of the disaster at Dusseldorf Airport.Within this Standard the escape route signs required to conform should be in accordance with ISO 7010. Guidance on the use of directional arrows for egress in conjunction with the appropriate escape route sign is also part of this Standard. This Standard compliments BS 5499 Part 4 2000 Code of practice for escape route signs.
BS Technical Committee (PH 8) and ISO Technical Committee (TC 145) have been informed that ISO 7010 2010 will be adopted as an EN and the annex to EC Directive 92/58 will be withdrawn this year. All applications have been completed, adoption approved the time element is just the way it goes in Brussels.
-
Much appreciated Jim please keep us informed.
-
Thanks Tom and Jim, just one more question, until ISO 7010 is adopted, should I tell consultants for our building projects to use BS5499-4 or BS ISO 16069 2004 or both? Thanks a lot for your help :)
-
I got the first mailshot from a signs company today about all this!
Fine for new, but I'm not changing an existing sign because it's foot's slightly different (as described in the blurb) and eagerly await the summons as a result of my reckless abandon!
With the economy in the state it is and budgets tight, I'm going to consider a lot of other more important measures before I change signs that are still comprehensible.
Can anyone cite a real life case of a purpose made fire exit sign (as oppose to no signs, home made signs) causing death or injury?
-
But AB. If it isn't to the right standard it might come loose and fall on someone's head and kill them - for ever.
-
As Anthony points out there is a minor difference between the graphical symbol in BS 5499 and ISO 7010 and are not likely to confuse anyone and I would totally agree that these signs do not require changing until they fall apart, however there are a huge number of escape route signs that are completely different in colour and design, specifically the so called Euro Sign but also derivitives of same with different reversed graphical symbol small arrows white blocks etc etc. Testing to ISO 9186 and Japanese consumer research has shown that these types of signs are not understood and have been clearly rejected. If the process of risk assessment is to work then this must be a significant finding.
The late Dr Jonathan Sime would always tell me that evacuees are all predesposed to react and try to leave buidings the way they came in and this may result in loss of ASET by time and elongated travel distance, he said his research pointed to the conclusion that in order to influence evacuee behaviour another way it would need to be of the highest integrity. This information would need to be continuous, unambiguous and the evacuee must be able to predict the next piece of information at any decision point if they are to remain confident and maintain effective egress. I have always adopted this as my guiding principle for safety wayguidance. The work of Tranter and Paul, most recently with Jake Paul as a function of stairway guidance in the aftermath of 9/11 has support this view.
There is plenty of evidence out there of evacuees being confused during evacuation, I have already mentioned Dusseldorf Airport and I recall the fatality of a middle aged couple in a hotel in Bolton on a Friday afternoon and in other statements of surviving evacuees recorded that there was confusion and not knowing where to go to escape. The fine to this hotel group was in six figures.
I agree with Anthony it is all a matter of priority, my advice is that the facts should be given to the Responsible Person and he will ultimately decide whether to take the risk. The facts are that so called Euro Signs are likely to confuse! The evidence is overwhelming!
-
I have come across a "new" sign in a training programme which is red with white text and graphics. Flames to right hand side, hand with index finger pointing at a graphic of a MCP and text "Fire Alarm Call Point" below.
Is this a new european sign?
-
It's not new, but it is I believe in the ISO?
Some Health & Safety related pictograms have changed too, most notably the PPE, hazard (lots of new ones here) and Access ones.
I won't miss the Euro symbol though, never ever used it even with exit boxes, always the BS one with text.
-
It's not new, but it is I believe in the ISO?
Some Health & Safety related pictograms have changed too, most notably the PPE, hazard (lots of new ones here) and Access ones.
I won't miss the Euro symbol though, never ever used it even with exit boxes, always the BS one with text.
Thanks AB. The "new" bit was a word they used to describe it.
-
Is the reason behind not using text because of multi-lingual europe and graphics being a more practical way of giving information to many nationalities?
If so how do you deal with signs, like the general fire notice, which give text phases only? This information would be more difficult for migrant workers, lacking basic English skill, to understand than a simple word like "Exit" yet it only seems to be exit signs which must only be graphical.
I have factory with 6 languages in the workforce with English being the least of. The usual general fire notice provides safety information on what to do in the event of a fire. To provide neccessary signage in this situation would require 6 at each MCP.
To me the ISO one would best suit in my situation with relavant interpreted information posted in the likes of the canteen of what the various graphic sign means in the employees native language.
-
You'll have to star putting those multi-lingual fire action signs up that Signs International* made in 9 languages!
It's a fair point and also applies to health & safety signs and a large number of mandatory fire signs where there is no pictogram beyond the general one for that category of sign & the text gives the actual message.
Certainly on the safety sign there are lots of new weird & wonderful symbols in this ISO, particularly in the warning category, to try and get around this.
*Signs International, formerly a largish player in the signs industry and for many years in the 80'searly 90's were the main supplier for Chubb & Pyrene finally lost the fight last year and is no more.
-
Fire Action Notices are just that.............. they are not fire safety signs. They are not within the scope of BS 5499 nor ISO 7010. Historically only the blue circle with text "Fire Action" was Standardised not as a safety sign but mandatory fire safety notices as with " Fire door keep shut" etc
The introduction of Fire Safety Signs (Graphical Symbols) within fire action notices was to ensure appropriate guidance is given to employees on the meaning of safety signs and the actions to be taken in conjuction with signs. This is a requirement under the Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulation 1996. The graphical symbols in an appropiate order... 1. Alarm....2. Escape..... 3. Assemble is extremely logical in my opinion, especially as the notice would be in addition to formal training.
-
The Euro Shxxe s to be rejected?? :D
Oh hell, there must be a God after all. Looks like my Sunday mornings are booked up then....Praise be to BS....
-
Back to the annoying Euro design standard :
One problem that may be a wee bit overlooked is the numebr of these signs "out" there in the real world. The ones dangling overhead are all made in China, by hundreds of companies supplying millions of units to thousands of suppliers within Europe from fire specialists to Argos - for example. Point being every man and his dog has them for sale to a massive market. This obviously means there is a massive stock out there which ain't gonna disapear overnight.
The emergency lights are specified and purchased on an availability at cost option (the supplier only stock what is available to him), not a design specification and its a long time before any concentious or intellegent fire protection personage points out the issues by which time its too late.
Unfortunately these things are with us for some time to come yet so don't be too worried about missing them.
-
Psuedonym, there has never been a European Standard for fire safety signs! The adoption of ISO 7010 will be the first and only European Standard for Safety Signs... It has pained me for the last 15 years to hear people give credability to a European bureaucratic c*ck up.
I was at a launch of a BAFE specified accreditation for Emergency Lighting at the Houses of Parliament last night to find that the BAFE display and printed publicity material was illustrated with escape route signs that do not conform. Emblazoned with the phrase "Promoting Quality in Fire Safety" so much for 3rd party accreditation! to add insult to injury the event was in the Jubilee Rooms above our precious old parliamentary chamber....the room no longer than 20 Metres and no wider than 6 metres with 2 escape doors one signed not to BS 5499 but to ISO 7010/ ISO 16069 at one end and one signed totally incorrectly with Euro sign derivitive at the other......so much for emergency lighting installers!
The real world craves STANDARDISATION for the sake of understanding and safety and the implementation relies heavily on the integrity of designers, installers, commissioners and maintenance professionals as well as risk assessors carrying out audit and review to put right that which is clearly a potential risk. As I have said consistently since 1996.....15 long years..... signs are only effective if they are intuitively understood using safety signs that are not is a disaster waiting to happen. Playing pictionary with peoples lives should not be an option.
-
Sorry Jim, I only meant the word to be taken in it's literal meaning not in any legal capacity.
Although no longer my field, I too am still pained to see these designs flooding our country. It's a marketing fact that throwing enough subtle hints will sell any idea to the masses and this is one example. (look at our leaders in those hallowed grounds to see a terrific example of mind games winning over facts)
My views were formed many moons ago following a very interesting course at a certain sign manufacturer and stayed ever since. Unfortunately as your latest experiences prove, there's a lot of education and standardisation and even policing needed but it's marketing which will always win.
If risk assessors are ignoring the MoE standards then it's going to be long time before there will be any change.
-
Thanks Tom and Jim, just one more question, until ISO 7010 is adopted, should I tell consultants for our building projects to use BS5499-4 or BS ISO 16069 2004 or both? Thanks a lot for your help :)
+1: for the sake of us non-specialists, if we are specifying standards for the design, installation & maintenance of emergency exit signage, I'd be very grateful for Jim's definitive advice as to what is/are is the correct currect 'best practice' standard(s) to refer to?
-
BS 5499 Part 4 2000 is the document that should be refered to for escape route sign design and application guidance. Implementation of this standard will give...Compliance.....Conformance and....Performance.....for those that require 3rd Party accreditation.
-
I read that EN 7010 will effectively become "European law" but that existing signage will not be expected to be torn down and replaced, only that new signage should conform.
Surely not replacing existing (man chasing fridge) non-conforming signage, will be an illegal act and will lead to a greater mix of Euro and BS signage?
How are we supposed to advise our customers correctly when this ambiguity exists?
John
-
Going Back to the original question. This site allows downloading and printing of all safety signs. They can be sized to your requirements etc.
http://www.selfprintsigns.co.uk/?page_id=1211
What standard you wish to use is up to you.
-
I am not sure I understand the last posting " What standard you wish to use is up tp you" ??? What does this actually mean? What are the choices in your opinion?
Having just reviewed the site recommended I have looked at 2 safety signs illustrated....Fire Extinguisher location sign and Escape Route location sign neither of which conform to any known international nor domestic standard for fire safety signs.
According to this site you have a choice of colour for hazard signs which is illegal under the health and safety(safety signs and signals)regulations.
The objective of ISO 7010 is to harmonise all these differences to ensure no misunderstanding. The power of adoption as an EN is that there is an obligation for all member states to revise domestic standards.
-
I responded to the original post If you do not like them do not use them.
-
Again I have to say I do not understand your comment.....This is not a personal thing...preference on graphical symbols is not based on subjective abstract appreciation...it is based on the standardised graphical symbol with the best intuitive understanding....We are not in art or graphic appreciation personal preference or personal choice. Choice is not an option... The graphical symbols for life safety are standardised to ensure comprehension, understanding and to influence evacuee behaviour......without clear intuitive understanding there is no influence. All other options increase the risk matrix... The website you recommended did not reflect best practice and in my opinion was worthless.
-
I read with great interest,relief and not best hidden howls of delight, Jim's article "Sign Language" (FRM Journal - May). Really glad to see the demise of fridge freezer man and the adoption of ISO 7010. Will this really end the confusion of escape route signs? Will EN 7010 be retrospective? Will BS fire exit signs become extinct? What will happen to HTM 65? Who will be responsible for the emptying of the construction worlds shed full of these awful 'Euro symbol' signs and subsequent bonfire?
-
I read with great interest,relief and not best hidden howls of delight, Jim's article "Sign Language" (FRM Journal - May). Really glad to see the demise of fridge freezer man and the adoption of ISO 7010.
Despite the adoption of the ISO 7010 as an EN and the annex to EC Directive 92/58 being withdrawn this year. (hopefully) We will still have to wait for the The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996 to be amended before we see the demise of fridge freezer man and the legislation may not require an immediate change?
-
I will say this yet again as most contributors to this forum probably weren't born when I said it the first time....The Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations is not prescriptive, if it were then every sign in the UK (with the exception of Barking Station) does not satisfy the legislation. Which has been my point since 1986 when I first saw EC Directive 82/58.....There are 5 different Graphical symbols for escape plus the 4 arrows meaning "this way". Intelect immediately discounted this in practice but our legislators left it in the legislation. So if the legislation were prescriptive you would have the situation that a suplementary arrow is pointing in one direction and the arrow within the graphical symbol is pointing in another direction. This is because although there are 5 different graphical symbols there is not one that points egress to the right. Intelect has already told us that this is stupid with the exception of Barking Station but at least here they have used arrows pointing in the same direction.
It seems so clear to me that correct guidance is BS 5499 Part 4. But hey after 25 years who am I to keep banging on about it.
-
er.........
oh yes they are Mr Creak!
If I don't have a battery backup in my alarm I can get prosecuted.
davo
-
I agree with all you say but EN 7010 will make no difference to the present situation unless EC Directive 82/58 is amended and consequently The Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations. Unless of course you wish to continue for the next 25 years campaigning for BS 5499 Part 4 to be adopted as the definitive national standard regarding fire escape signs.
It will also be up to the legislators to do a better job the next time around.
-
Davo, You only need a guaranteed power supply, it does not prescribe a battery. A battery may well be a very good provision but as far as the legislation is concerned you need neither if your risk assessment does not require you to have an alarm and the responsible person can satisfactorily raise the alarm another way. I am sure like me you would say this is not an option but the legislation gives the responsible person exactly that option.
Which is my point..the provision of any system is risk appropriate and it is for the competent person to provide suitable and sufficient arrangements to meet the objectives of the fire safety strategy. If the competent person provide fire safety signs that are not understood, have no provenance and can be misleading it has to be a matter of professional liability. The annex illustrations in an EC Directive, like the guaranteed power supply are to be interpreted by a competent person into satisfactory robust provision. This is where code and standards sit and should stand professional scritiny and test.
-
Same difference, Jim ;D
What about the suppliers then? If I get prosecuted cam I pass it on ???
davo
-
Now that answer needs to be analysed.....Same difference? What does that actually mean?...Doesn't matter perhaps?
Colour green? Rectangular in shape? Near enough?
Yes suppliers should be under trade description legislation. But in the bigger picture and in the realm of things it is very unlikely and probably a justifiable reason to just let confusion reign. OK
-
Jim if a RP insisted using the so called euro-sign with conforms to The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996 as a FRS would you be prepared to take him to court?
-
If I were an FRS I would advise the RP that the fire safety means of escape signs do not conform and that in my professional opinion this is significant within the framework of the fire risk assessment. I would advise however that the RP has a choice and can do exactly as he wants, the RP is the only person that has this discretion however when the proverbial hits the fan the RP has to justify the decision and may be held liable. I would advise him that an RP is supposed to be competent to provide suitable arrangements if not the RP has an obligation to seek competent advice. The competent advice to satisfy both RRO and the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations would be to conform to a recognised Standard. If subsequently I were to be called as an expert witness I would have no trouble in discrediting any decision to use signs that do not conform. They are confusing, misunderstood and slow egress. The court would decide if that were negligent.
If the RP has sought professional advice from Designer, EL supplier or Safety Sign manufacturer I would advise him to seek redress and compensation for supplying product that does not conform to requirements.
-
And if I were in the dock accused in accordance with your witness I could almost guarantee I could point to the illuminated exit sign at the rear of the public gallery and that would not comply either. Case dismissed.
I know two wrongs dont make a right Jim and I support your crusade but there is a huge mountain to climb and nobody to help carry your bags.
-
Jim
Here in West Yorkshire half the population seem to be european, indeed the Superdrug warehouse uses dual english/polish H & S signage.
Can you see the dilemma?
davo
-
I am sure in an emergency the magistrate will still leave by another route. The concerns I have are present wherever signs are used that have no accreditation nor provenance regardless of where they are. Court of law or not If they are not understood they will have little or no influence. If you want to influence egress speed then communication should be precise and authorative not open to conjecture and possible misinterpretation. If you wish to defend the status quo that's fine it is just not the competent decision. As I said before, In my opinion you should not play pictionary with peoples lives.
The adoption of ISO 7010 as a European Norm and the removal of the annex (illustrations) in EC Directive 92/58 will require the RP to audit and review the current situation and the Management of Health and Safety regulations requires the RP to impliment changes in technology and improvements for the prime objective of collective protection....This is a primary difference of the RRO over the prescriptive regime of certification under the old Fire Precaution Legislation.
-
I think the problem Jim is two fold.
1) Signage isn't a trivial issue but it is much lower down on the list of priorities when it comes to other fire precautions
2) There isn't any overwhelming evidence to demonstrate that the signage is not being understood
I was responsible for managing fire safety at a site with multiple risk buildings, some had the so called euro signs, some buildings had BS signage, and some even had the HTM style signage.
I even printed off my own signs from time to time too. The signage wasn't drastically different. They were always the same colour (green for exit signs) with directional arrow, a running person, and a door in all examples.
When I used to do staff and visitor training , which included foreign nationals, they all understood the signage. So... I don't fully understand where the confusion is coming from, and whether it is such a big problem in the scheme of things.
-
Research and testing carried out under ISO 9186 and previously by leading experts in Japan on graphical symbols and specifically for comprehension for escape route signs is overwhelming evidence that the so called Euro sign is not understood. LIF and ICEL had to withdraw technical support for the use of these signs in 1997 as a function of the concerns expressed over comprehension credentials.
My particular expertise is human behaviour, egress in escape so I concede that in terms of succesful outcome my priority will always be speed of egress, correct decision making and effective communication. I concede that the sign over the last door is irrelevant it is what happens between the start of evacuation and that point. The so called Euro Signs do not accomodate for this. All of the above have an influence on ASET which is fundamental for all provision.
The adoption of ISO 7010 as an EN and the removal of the annex to EC 82/58 will require implementation. That was the answer to the original question, what priority the RP's puts on this will be for them to decide. In my professional, competent opinion this should be sooner rather than later.
-
Forgive my ignorance Jim, what was the source of confusion that ISO and other research found? Is it colour? Shapes? Pictograms? Is it possible to summarise their findings?
Im not knocking the issue, and it is clear you are passionate about it, but it is the first time I've been made aware of any significant issues with signage, to this degree.
-
Within EC Directive 92/58 the Euro sign and UK legislation is illustrated in 5 different formats as prescribed...This is the first source of confusion. 5 different designs with a theoretical single use...very confusing..... the 5 different signs illustrated are composed of 2 and 3 elements.....in the case of the 2 element signs arrow and white rectangle in case of the 3 element signs moving person arrow and white rectangle. Whilst in practice most manufacturers, suppliers and specifiers have by intelect dismissed 3 of the illustrated signs without moving person which left 2 signs one with moving person arrow left and white rectangle, the other illustrated sign had moving person arrow pointing down and white rectangle. To make life more confusing the arrow giving direction of egress(this way) is supplementary to these sign illustrations. In comprehension testing intuitive meaning was extremely difficult when dealing with so many different graphical elements. Where as intuitive comprehension for means of escape signs on accordance with BS 5499 Part 4 were 100%
I apologise but this is most simple way of explaining the total confusion and why it is necessary to turn to the Standard BS 5499 Part 4 to satisfy fire safety signage requirements for means of escape provision.
-
Still not sure I follow Jim
You say that most manufacturers produce signage with "three elements" - the running person, arrow and ice cream block (white rectangle) and then mention two specific signs... the first being "fire exit left" the other being "fire exit down" (which some people use to mean fire exit "straight on")
Both the BS and Euro Style feature the three elements (Ok the BS version features the running person effectively inside the white rectangle, the Euro style does not)
So what confusion has arised out of these two versions of the sign?
And why mention the fire exit left and fire exit down / straight on sign? - I still dont follow the significance of that
Is it the fact that people dont know what the ice cream block represents in the Euro style signage?
-
The adoption of ISO 7010 as an EN and the removal of the annex to EC 82/58 will require implementation.
I agree Jim and this will mean the legislators will have to revise our legislation to comply with the European directive. IMO, as it stands at this moment, the so called Euro-sign is in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations however I agree it is not as effective as the British Standard sign. But will a RP be prepared to change all his Euro signs to the British standard signs when the Euro signs are in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations, very much doubt it. I also doubt an FRS would be willing to take an RP to court for displaying a legal sign.
A secondary question is has EN 7010 and the revised directive been implemented yet?
-
The graphical symbol for escape route as specified in BS 5499 and ISO 7010 is a single graphical symbol...person moving through opening...when tested against 3000+ other variants had the highest comprehension credentials. When this graphical symbol is supplemented by an arrow the arrow provides effective egress direction.....very simple very effective.....tested and proven.
Euro symbols white rectangles the meaning of which is not intuitive and open for conjecture, moving person meaning intuitive but when associated with a arrow that is pointing to a cofusing graphical element that is also subject to confusion....next according to the annex if you need to give directional information it prescribes another arrow of different design which if you follow the annex information could point in the opposite direction to the small arrow incorporated into the sign. This is crazy...what the sign industry has done is understand that it is and has decide to create thier own products to fill the gaps....Euro signs that are derivatives of those illustrated. This cannot be satisfactory....it is like someone not liking the sound of morse code so he adds a few more dashes. Just as crazy.
Just look around at the mess....I was in an uk airport last week and the airport estates have adopted ISO 7010 International Standard and the concession retailers the Euro design.....not joined up thinking at all.
The legislators have indicated that there is no reason to change the legislation as they have indicated that they intend to withdraw the annex (the pictures) and refer to ISO 7010 for compliance for all workplace safety signs. This process is in line to be completed this year.
I concede that it is not necessary to change signs, in some cases I am recommending thier removal completely as with the retail environments within the airport and the same over the front door of retail outlets in shopping centres as a function of risk assessment......illumination yes signs not needed.
All I advocate as a consequence of the impending changes it is wise to consider the process of audit and review, not of one sign but the whole system of signs throughout the means of escape. Consider the provenance of BS 5499 Part 4 and ISO 7010. After all implementation is a matter for the profession not enforcers. Prevention of confusion is required not prosecution after the event.
-
Jim you have said this many times before and I fully agree with you, my argument is the Euro-sign is in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations, which allow variation SCHEDULE 1 Part II (1), and therefore legal. Consequently I repeat, will a RP be prepared to change all his Euro signs to the British standard signs when the Euro signs are in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations, very much doubt it. I also doubt an FRS would be willing to take an RP to court for displaying a legal sign.
I suspect we will be living with Euro-sign for some time to come depending if the revised directive forces the legislators to revise the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations.
-
All I can say repeatedly is.....As a function of the variation allowed under schedule 1 Part II BS 5499 and ISO7010 were developed and that in the unanimous opinion of both International and British Standards Committees representing every aspect of fire safety, enforcement authority, built environment, disability and representation industry associations that there is an appropriate technical solution to safety wayguidance for the built environment. That technical solution has been developed because of the fear of confusion, misunderstanding and possible dangers inherent with using graphical symbols with low comprehension credentials.
The technical best practice solution for design is BS 5499 ISO 7010 and for design and application Part 4......if that does not suit the RP then that is a significant risk he has every right to accept.
I only advocate that the RP is informed of the current developments so that the whole problem is not perpetuated for longer than necessary.
-
Agreed, but surfing the web most fire exit signs conform to the BS however if you require an illuminated signs I did not find one that conformed to the BS all were Euro signs, where can RP,s purchase illuminated BS signs? What is the situation regarding ICEL?
-
ICEL /LIF are technical committee members of PH8/1 responsible for fire safety signs. They have written to all their members withdrawing technical support for the Euro Signs in October 1997...Their members maintain the problem rests with enforcers and architects...so the problem perpetuates.
Conformance and specification is buyers responsibility........suppliers will sell you what you ask for....caveat emptor.
-
A small number of suppliers so supply exit boxes with BS legends, but in the main the only other way is to get the exit boxes without the legend factory applied and to buy separate BS overlays to fit from people like Jactone & Jalite.
Which is quite a lot of faffing about, hence why people often just still the euro signs up.
-
Which is exactly why I have consistently said leave light boxes to illuminate and signs to sign......separate them there is no valid reason for them to be combined.
-
As the Euro directive is to be amended withdraw the annex (the pictures) and refer to ISO 7010 then surely the Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations will have to be amended which will make the Euro-sign illegal and the manufactures of illuminated exit boxes will have to conform?
-
In the interests of making progress should we review the guidance not to mix signs in buildings? I have had a discussion with an architect this morning to persuade him to incorporate BS5499/ISO7010 in an extension to a school building.
There are numerous Euro signs in the existing parts of the school and the school cannot afford to replace them.
The architect proposed to install Euro signs in the new extension to be consistent. I have used Jims argument over ISO7010 and understanding to persuade him to install BS5499 signs in the new extension because it is the only way we will ever start to make progress. Other signs in the building will only be replaced as and when they wear out.
Was I right?
-
They might not have much choice - the five biggest signs manufacturers and distributors have discontinued the EC sign, only one of the remaining medium/big players still offers them, which means most outlets (who buy from one of the big six and use distributor catalogues) can only supply the BS or ISO sign.
So unless you expect RP's to undergo wholesale replacement of every sign and exit box you are going to have to mix.
-
I have never concerned myself with mixing for two reasons......Euro signs are normally installed over final doors and with all due respect to all my previous arguments anything green, rectangular and illuminated will be recognised in this location and context.......secondly it is the wayguidance message that is vitally important to progress evacuees through the means of escape, the signs that are fitted at changes of direction and indicating alternative escape routes that have to influence alternative behaviour under emergency conditions. These escape route signs need to be intuitive and immediately understood.
Obviously it would be ideal to change to the best convention which is BS5499 / ISO 7010 and the most cost effective way is to replace the back illuminated sign with an ordinary sign or photoluminescent sign. I have done many calculations to find that there is by a huge margin sufficient illumination under emergency lighting to satisfy requirements. With a photoluminescent escape route sign with performance to satisfy ISO 17398 for less than £15.00 you have belt and braces. Save energy, save maintenance and very effective.