Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Technical Advice / BR 187 2.2.4?
« Last post by Revol on November 18, 2024, 06:28:16 PM »
Is the 'u' in h/uw or w/uh at the bottom of figure 15 a typo?

The equation is to find 'u' when d (distance), h (hight), w (width) are known ... am I being thick (again)?
2
Guides and Legislation Links / Draft fire safety guides for 2025
« Last post by AnthonyB on November 12, 2024, 09:58:24 PM »
Another consultant was given a copy of the draft "Guide to Fire Safety Measures for Persons with Duties - Sleeping Accommodation" one of the sector specific supplements to the new proposed "Principles of Fire Safety" core guidance document.

However he did not get it from a professional body or similar but an end client! Web searches come up with nothing so the question is:

- Where are the drafts available from?
- How can comments & feedback be passed?

Looking at the draft for Sleeping Risk it certainly looks a useful guide with what at first glance seems missing presumably being in 'Principles' to prevent the repetitive nature of the existing DCLG guides
3
Fire Safety / Re: MCP Inside Fats
« Last post by SJGBlue on July 10, 2024, 09:58:31 PM »
Thanks AnthonyB.
That makes a lot of sense I did not think about the weekly testing etc.
and the Heat detectors inside the flat entrances will be done!

S
4
Fire Safety / Re: MCP Inside Fats
« Last post by AnthonyB on July 10, 2024, 09:22:01 PM »
I'd be far more concerned that the flats only have a sounder off the common system inside and not a heat detector off it as well near the door to the common areas (as a minimum). If it has a common alarm & thus presumably a simultaneous evacuation policy then that is usually something not to the standard for stay put (compartmentation, lack of suitable common area smoke control, etc) so it's usually vital to sound the alarm whilst the fire is still contained & not yet fully developed in the flat of origin - the detection being a back up in case the occupiers of the flat of fire origin are out when the fire starts or forget to activate a call point.

Flats are not usually provided with call points (access and testing once a year for the detector is bad enough without adding a call point) however this doesn't mean they might never be appropriate - whilst there is a 'typical' minimum specification for an alarm system for simultaneous evacuation in flats it's down to the situation in a particular building as to what is needed and sometimes it's more - I've seen common systems take the place of the flats self contained LD2 system (using conventional zones with hush buttons or the addressable common loop with suitable C&E) or even, albeit rare, a common L1 system covering virtually every area & room, common or flat, in a building, due to the particular scenerio
5
Fire Safety / MCP Inside Fats
« Last post by SJGBlue on July 10, 2024, 10:20:59 AM »
Hi,
I have a Building that has had a fire alarm installed and there are some things I am not sure the alarm is fitted to standard.
The property is a 3 storey house with a basement converted into 4 flats one on each floor.
There is a fire alarm installed in the communal area only with sounders inside each flat and a single MCP at the main entrance, the flats have Mains Battery smoke/heat alarms fitted.

The Basement and ground floor have entrances from the communal area through the main door but also both have a separate exit each on the side of the building.

My question is, do the side exits need to have a Manual Call Point installed next to them?

They are in a self contained flat that has no detection connected to the main fire alarm just a sounder, I am just wondering if a fire broke out in one of these flats they have no way of alerting the other flats unless they go round to the front and activate the call point there.

Also is the chance of accidental false alarms a valid variation to not install MCP on each level in a converted buildings communal area?
thanks
S
6
Fire Safety / Maisonette Apartments & Lobby Protection
« Last post by FJ on February 27, 2024, 10:20:23 PM »
Hi,
I have a very small building conversion 2 storeys + basement.
The basement is accessed from external stairs only and is used for bike storage and utilities.
The ground floor has 3no. 1 bed apartments with independent direct external access to each.
The first floor has with 3no. 1bed maisonette apartments - each with a second floor at a height above ground of approximately 5.4m.
The maisonettes have an 'entrance lobby' separated from a kitchen and lounge at entrance level - but with entrance lobby stairs open to a first floor open plan bedroom at upper level.
Client is keen not to encroach on the stairs / bedroom with walls in an attempt to keep feature roof trusses exposed.
Normal practice would be to enclose the stairs to leave a protected lobby where you might have several bedrooms - but in this instance it is only 1 bedroom.

The building is very small and a common landing at first floor level discharges direct via a single flight of stairs to the ground level final exit.
The stairs are within 4.5m of the apartment entrances and the landing has an opening vent which could be automatic if required.
Again, normal practice is to have a lobbied stair but the ABD & BS examples all illustrate apartments on each level (above and below) so requirement for stair lobby protection is understandable - less so if the apartments are all on a single level.

Appreciate any thoughts on possible solutions with enhanced detection or venting?

Regards,
7
Technical Advice / mixture of smoke seals
« Last post by bevfs on February 20, 2024, 03:45:31 PM »
Hi all,
60min fire doorset fitted on fire compartment wall, fitted with a mixture of blade smoke seals on both door leaf sides, with brush smoke seal along the top .
Apparently direct from manufacturer.
My question is do door manufacturers test with not only one type of smoke seal, but various smoke seal arrangements?
With the cost of testing with mixed smoke seals, is there any financial  benefit to the door leaf manufacturer? I know its down to confirmation test evidence of the doorset ,but is this a practice that fire door manufacturers generally test with not only one type of smoke seal but mixed smoke seals as well?

Any information would be beneficial

thanks
8
Fire Alarm Systems / Re: Can a fire alarm sounder be TOO LOUD?
« Last post by lyledunn on February 12, 2024, 09:08:10 PM »
I have seen a study somewhere that showed a debilitating effect on mental agility as sound levels increase. Can?t find it but it wasn?t directly related to FA devices. However, I have experienced a kind of brain numbing effect when the banshee-type sounder operated during FA testing and I wasn?t wearing ear defenders.
Better to have more sounders and a more even distribution of sound levels.
9
Fire Alarm Systems / Re: Can a fire alarm sounder be TOO LOUD?
« Last post by bigblockofcheese on February 04, 2024, 10:05:00 AM »
Thank you, that's really helpful.

I do think there may be valid reasons not to install super-loud sounders in locations where users cannot immediately easily leave.

It will be worth looking at the DIL switches to see if the volume can be reduced slightly, to prevent aural pain.
10
Fire Alarm Systems / Re: Can a fire alarm sounder be TOO LOUD?
« Last post by AnthonyB on February 03, 2024, 07:17:57 PM »
BS 5839-1 states sound pressure levels should not "not greater than 120 dB(A) at any normally accessible point"

Many current 24V sounders are usually in the 85-95dB @ 1m range. The Banshee Excel, like some, can (depending on which of the 32 tones is used) be up to 110dB but the DIL switches include volume settings where you can reduce the dB by 10dB or 20dB id required.

Excessive sound was an issue when 240V fire alarm systems were common using motor driven sirens blasting out 127dB (you'd often see single sirens covering whole floors where you might have 2-4 or more now)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10