Fire Behaviour

[Clevelandfire]

No need to unsubscribe surely . Just having healthy debate arent we?

[Clevelandfire]

Kurnal to challenge you there I still take issue that standards are black and white - else why have them?. Why for instance did you suggest an L2 to BS 5839 in the hotel ? Of course straying from the guides and standards is acceptable but you still have to prove they do not make the scenario any worse than if you employed an accepted standard. And this is the point Im making. If you installed an non BS 5839 compliant system what would it be?

No Cleveland of course I would recommend an L2 for the hotel as the benchmark and I was then clear in my response to that posting  to qualify that by indicating  when I may increase the standard to L1 or maybe back it down to L3 in some cases. That is the risk assessment bit.
Hey i thought you were retired from the brigade? You are starting to sound a bit like one of those code huggers that Novascot is talking about. Sometimes black and white just cannot be achieved - take a 50 year old towerblock if 17 floors as an example with a single staircase and no ventilation. Theres no way you can install ventilation shafts or ducts or another staircase. So you have to do other things that make it as safe as you can.

No fair enough I see what you are saying. I am retired, but came back on temp contract.

[Midland Retty]

Well it looks like i missed all the fun over the weekend !
 
Doesn't seem any point  defending my comments as it would appear some people have unsubscribed???.

As Novascot said, don't bite your tongue Mr Retty

CivvyFSO I said "bite my lip" not my" tongue"....  do pay attention young man!
 
But I agree with you, healthy debate is a very good thing and is what makes Firenet brilliant. Where criticism is deserved then by all means lets discuss it and try to remedy it, but I  felt Novascot's concerns were directed at the greater FSO population rather than those local to him. ..As im sure if I started moaning about every fire safety consultant Id met being naughty bad terrible fire safety consultants others would have taken exception (Hence my " biting my lip" comment) As Cleveland points out this can be detremental. But since Nova has pointed out that was not the case I shall move on...

 

I agree with most of what you say but you are not grasping the thorn in the arguement.

Novascot please see point (c) in my previous post where i describe what you should do if you encounter an unprofessional FSO - Im not failing to grasp the thorn of the argument at all ( mind you I cant see any thorns here - apparently its a forum and any physical actions such as biting lips dont exist etc. :-) Theres not a lot else i can suggest - unless senior officers in the brigade are aware of the public / proffesionals view of them how do you expect them to go about doing something about it? What do you suggest Novascot? (and I ask without any sarcastically)
 
And tut tut I was trying to be friendly yet you had a quip about having to justify specifying a fire alarm from L2 standard to L1 ! Not to an FSO you won't - to the RP / client you might.

Also the point I was making about being in court referred to serious case offences as Clevelandfire has now sort of answered for me. I was pointing out that it can be a really hairy experience having your work and assessment picked over by clever barrosters and that it is incredibly important to have your facts ready. It will not be Fire Safety Officer in the dock, as Im sure you realise.
 

Hi Midland

The benchmark for your hotel ( is it one I look after perchance)

Hi Prof.... shame on you, hopefully you know me better than that - I would never ever bring up here any 'live cases' - especially ones youre involved with, it would be unprofessional of me to do so let alone anything else. Purely ficticious hotel I promise you.
 
The reaon I asked was a demonstration that we all use guides. You all pretty much said we wanted an L2 system in my FICTICIOUS hotel or something near depending on several factors to BS 5839.
 
What id like to know next is why you chose BS 5839 in particular. Was it because the sleeping accomodation guide says so? Building Regs say so? Was it through experience / judgement / knowledge of that particular standard that you specidifed that?
 
I await your answers with interest.

[Davo]

Gents

Yes you do get the odd p***t  FSO but most I have dealt with are reasonable chaps.
Same goes for FSCs. One I know hadn't a clue and wanted £500 a day to demonstrate it (nobody on here lets make it clear)

As far as I am concerned I choose Doc B and a sprinkling of BS and the guides only when I have to.
And yes, I confess, you people out there for common sense/realism!
I remember attending a Home Office presentation in Nottingham where I was told ( I think) 29 people were on the committee that wrote the guides, this didn't inspire me with confidence, nor possibly my fellow delegates most of whom disappeared after an agreeable lunch.

Novascot, nobody gets personal on here, Chris quite rightly wouldn't allow it!

davo

[CivvyFSO]

My choice of L2 was because it would be the category suggested by the BS5839 standard. Really, I should have left it stated simply as a BS5839 system, and leave the choice to the designer, who should use the standard AND their own judgement/knowledge as to what is required.

[kurnal]

Yes agreed. Would not have a problem with other fire alarm systems designed installed and maintained in accordance with standards from other countries,  provided they were equivalent and did the job. But I would have to do a lot of homework on them first. (At the clients expense of course).

[Midland Retty]

Aha !

Exactly the point I was trying to make!.

Without benchmark standards we have nothing to compare alternatives standards to. Half the time such alternatives are, as near as damn it, the same as the benchmark standards.....perhaps with a different name, perhaps with a slightly different specification but otherwise generally the same.

Which makes me wonder why the benchmark wasn't chosen in the first place. Factors such as cost may come into play I suppose, but on the whole none of us would wish to lessen any standards set in benchmark guidance would we?.

I also accept that away from guides and standards common sense must come into play too - such as Novascot's furniture in escape routes in his res care home - which i'd have no real problems / concerns about.

So code huggers do have a bad name, but when you break it down many alternatives or compensatory features are actually discussed and proposed in the benchmark guides and codes - such as what compensations can be allowed if sprinklers or other engineered solutions are installed for example. Thus if you do encounter a code hugger you  may still find an element of flexibility - because if alternatives are mentioned in the guide then they will generally accept it!

In conclusion then I will still argue that benchmark standards are essential in the fire safety field. To vere away from them is perfectly acceptable if you can prove the alternative will achieve the same level of protection.  

Where they don't or where such alternatives cant easily be measured or tested I think an assessor maybe on dodgy ground, and would need to brace themselves if anything went wrong seriously wrong, putting people at serious risk.

I'll leave you with this then....based on my "ficticious hotel fire alarm question" aren't we all to a greater or lesser extent guide huggers in some way shape or form?

[Clevelandfire]

Thankyou. Whole heartedly agree Retty. Well put.

[Chris Houston]

But I agree with you, healthy debate is a very good thing and is what makes Firenet brilliant.

Hurrah!

[Chris Houston]

Novascot, nobody gets personal on here, Chris quite rightly wouldn't allow it!

Correct