Sort of detection in disabled room ?

[colin todd]

Kurnal, it is a combination of the two, with the intent of giving equivalent safety to disabled persons and able bodied people. As you rightly say, I have always been clear that the detector in the bedroom is intended to warn those beyond the room of origin. However, a mobility impaired person needs extra warning to compensate for their lack of mobility plus the possible need for early assistance.

[Benzerari]

Kurnal, it is a combination of the two, with the intent of giving equivalent safety to disabled persons and able bodied people. As you rightly say, I have always been clear that the detector in the bedroom is intended to warn those beyond the room of origin. However, a mobility impaired person needs extra warning to compensate for their lack of mobility plus the possible need for early assistance.

But what paragraph is stating both, or at least the second bit?...

[colin todd]

The standard is peppered with references to this effect.

[Benzerari]

The standard is peppered with references to this effect.

mmmmmhhhhhhh;

Just to say, I haven't understood, I am still confused, as usual  

[colin todd]

If you can be specific as to the point of confusion, I will try to de-confuse you.

[Benzerari]

Are you suggesting that the intention of the smoke detector in the disabled room is to alert the occupant of the room in the incipient stages of the fire in order to maximize the time available to make their own escape, or is it to alert others with responsibility to go and assist the disabled person in the event of the fire in their room?

I think this is clearly explained by (Note 2...)  Mentioned by CregC earlier in page 48 of BS5839 part 1, the paragraph doesn't state any thing about your second bit (....to alert others with responsibility to go and assist the disabled person in the event of the fire in their room), but probably in a different paragraphs... etc and in that case what is it?

Colin the confusion is in the above...

[colin todd]

The distinction is academic. The intention in BS 5839-1 is to compensate for a mobility impaired person' disability, moving their level of safety towards that afforded to their able bodied peers. Earlier warning of a fire in their bedroom achieves this.

[kurnal]

1- A person with impaired mobility may take much longer to physically remove themselves to a place of safety in the event of a fire in their room. Totally agree.
2- Providing a smoke detector in their room is likely to alert them to a fire situation as quickly as possible. maximising their opportunity to escape. I agree. So we put smoke detection in those hotel rooms designated for use by disabled people. Great.
3- The other bedrooms have heat detectors. The heat detector will not operate before conditions in the room have become untenable. So fully ambulant people- who only have the benefit of being able to move more quickly when required- have to rely on their senses to wake them before conditions become untenable in the event of a fire in their room.
4- It seems to me that taking a time line approach, time to detection is more likely to be a critical factor than time to respond if the fire is in your bedroom. And the able bodied guests are at a disadvantage here.

OK so statistics show that nobody is dying as a result of fires in hotel bedrooms but the logic appears flawed to me.  We are not comparing apples with apples.

[Davo]

Totally agree Prof

If I remember my research correctly of a few years ago (not having it at home, I'm not that sad)

Smoke detects in 37 secs, Heat 2m15 secs ( average for the brand I was reading the data sheets for)
Nose detects in under 30 secs in the source room, sooooooooooo the odds are you will wake in your hotel room before the HD goes off.


BS metal bin with paper test
davo

[Benzerari]

Totally agree Prof

If I remember my research correctly of a few years ago (not having it at home, I'm not that sad)

Smoke detects in 37 secs, Heat 2m15 secs ( average for the brand I was reading the data sheets for)
Nose detects in under 30 secs in the source room, sooooooooooo the odds are you will wake in your hotel room before the HD goes off.


BS metal bin with paper test
davo

What do you mean by that Davo?

[colin todd]

I cannot see the flaw in the logic I am afraid. The Home Office didn't either when they wrote the purple guide, and the BSI commitee didn't when BS 5839-1 was written, but it could be we are all wrong.  The more time you buy for a disabled person to escape, or be assisted with escape, the more you move them towards equivalence with able bodied people. All disabled fire safety boils down to creating equivalence for disabled people, which is a worthy objective.  The extent of the benefit may be in question, but the fact that it is a benefit is somewhat indisputable. Other than wave a magic wand to give them back their mobility, I cannot see what else, in terms of timelines, we can do, and to perform such a miracle would take a Principal Officer, and they are all too busy doing other miracles.