Door Retainers

[David Rooney]

There is an old topic that talks about the category of system required where door retainers are installed.

5839 table a1 suggests L5/M, the CFOA guidance 2003 suggests L3.

Which one takes precedence??

[wee brian]

They both mean the same thing - put detectors where you need them.

[David Rooney]

Hmmmm

Thanks !

[AnthonyB]

L3/m is not the same as L5/M so they don't mean the same thing. L5 is 'putting them where you need them' or where a specific risk or situation requires them, e.g. an access room, but no where else.

L3 is clearly defined with detection to MoE and areas opening into them (slightly more detailed than that I know, but you get the jist)

Precedence is dependant on the risk, hence the risk assessment legislation. Based on our AFD policy we would tend towards L3 as a minimum, but it does depend on the premises, usage, etc.

Bear in mind you want the doors to close before they let significant amounts of smoke through and of course heat/fire. traditional solutions were to put DS either side, but this doesn't account for passage of cold smoke.

I'd go for L3 unless I was very convinced that the response by manual means and shaft (l4) or risk specific (l5) would be quick enough to ensure prompt closure.

Also you need to ensure if you are looking just at life or at property protection too - Not every SC/A is shut at night like it should be & if you are relying to a degree on manual response you could have problems

[David Rooney]

L3/m is not the same as L5/M so they don't mean the same thing. L5 is 'putting them where you need them' or where a specific risk or situation requires them, e.g. an access room, but no where else.

L3 is clearly defined with detection to MoE and areas opening into them (slightly more detailed than that I know, but you get the jist)

My thoughts too.

The problem I have is when surveying a new take over and pointing out they have lots of automatic doors and only detectors in corridors (L4) that this isn't best practice, or compliant if wee brian's school of thought is right. Refering them to BS, there is nothing in black and white the end user can understand, as there is in the CFOA document which as stated says "L3".

So.... ultimately, are we within our rights to "condemn" an L4 "standard of installation" when door holders are involved, pointing our client's to the CFOA policy.?

[AnthonyB]

If you think that the risk is such that L4 will not provide a sufficiently rapid response, then yes, thats the point of Risk Assessment. The fact that you have the CACFOA Policy with L3 is helpful to your cause as at least it is black & white - so many clients are used to the straightforwardness of prescriptive regimes they expect to see a black & white bit of law telling them to do something & often question an RA finding with "what bit of law says do it that way???"

[David Rooney]

Thanks, I can see all that.

So the next question would be "are we qualified to assess the risk"?

I thought this was down to the client (who generally has even less idea). If we say the "L4" is fine, and the proverbial hits the fan, are we not opening ourselves up to a lawsuit?

According to the NSI, unless we have a degree in fire engineering then we are not qualified to carry out a fire risk assessment..!

So how can we possibly advise the client if their AFD is adequate ??!!

[kurnal]

David

Competence  as far as the UK is concerned is accepted as suggested in  the Management regs, for most H&S advice and risk assessment purposes.
 
A combination of training, qualification and experience without defining particular qualifications.
Fortunately fire has not gone down the more prescriptive line of the gas safety regs etc where specific qualifications are specified. It cannot to this because fire is too dynamic an issue.

I have met a number of fire engineers with degrees who were clearly not competent. They could drive the CFD model but had no idea what went on in the real world.

Use your existing qualifications, training and experience,  give your best advice, ensure you have adequate PI insurance in place, show due diligence and sleep soundly in your bed.

[David Rooney]

Top man

I'll start tonight with a large whisky to steady the nerves !

Thanks very much.