Fire Extinguisher Use Article in "Fire Prevention"

[AnthonyB]

It's too easy to make broad sweeping statements & this is reflected in the poor advice seen from both the public & private sector.

Coal mines are pretty confined spaces, yet NCB had powder extinguishers in abundance (3kg units every 25 yards, 9 kilo units at fire points). CO2 was also used, but far less underground, but not due to confinement, but due to gas dispersal by the high underground air velocity. Only Halon was banned underground.

If a room/space with electrical risks is so small as to be a problem then as per the BS you can put the risk specifc extinguisher outside the access point so it can be discharged from outside - you need to ensure what extinguisher you choose has a sufficent throw for this & also boost up a size to compensate for the loss of efficacy over range

[Ken Taylor]

Thanks, again, Anthony. It was the rooms which, although relatively small, need extinguishers sited internally that I particularly had in mind (eg 'cellars', rooms with fixed ladder access, underground rooms that are not part of larger buildings, etc). I shall continue with the risk assessment approach - of course.

Ken

[Dave]

Some very informative posts on this subject, and I agree with most.  The following quote does concern me a little though.

Ken Wrote,

‘I agree with Chris's risk assessment approach to training frequency and like to consider that as first-aiders require requalification every 3 years this, by extrapolation, could be considered as a maximum period between training sessions for other activity upon which the lives of people at work depend.’

The way I see it is that although the level of risk can differ, the actual operation of the extinguisher, in essence, remains the same.  I think that a person, who has been injured whilst trying to tackle a fire, would have a good case if they had not received practical training for two and a half years.  Imagine a firefighter having to use a piece of equipment, on which someone’s life could depend, and they hadn’t used or received practical training on it for two and a half years.

I have experienced many who look to the frequency of first aid training as a benchmark for practical fire extinguisher training.  I have to disagree that the two can be compared.  Furthermore the HSE has recognised that the current 3 year re-qualification (with no interim training) is flawed.  In the near future personnel qualified in FAW will have to attend annual training sessions as well as re-qualify every 3 years.

I personally think that it’s better to be safe than sorry, and practical fire extinguisher training for ‘designated’ fire wardens/marshals, should be carried out annually.

[Chris Houston]

Some very informative posts on this subject, and I agree with most.  The following quote does concern me a little though.

Ken Wrote,

‘I agree with Chris's risk assessment approach to training frequency and like to consider that as first-aiders require requalification every 3 years this, by extrapolation, could be considered as a maximum period between training sessions for other activity upon which the lives of people at work depend.’

Actually, what I suggested was:

...... hands on training every three years with a refresher every year

3 years is the normal period for safety first aiders, I think it is reasonable in the circumsntaces I described, but we are all going to have different opinions and the competant person will have to make theirs in the fire safety risk assessment.

I wonder what everyone else's opinions are...........

[AnthonyB]

From experience skills retention of first aid is poor over three years where it isn't being used regularly, even with annual refreshers it is only just acceptable.

Annual is the way to go where possible, certainly hands on is the bet way.

On a tangent, I prefer hands on with carbonaceous & hydrocarbon test fires to the LPG simulators as of get a realistic illustration of smoke, smouldering & the problem with deep solids and if you don't use the extinguisher properly the fire will not go out - LPG is too fake and gives false confidence - all the LPG simulator extinguisher footage I've seen reflects this - squirt at the flames & hey presto it's out (at the flick of a switch!)

[Simon Morriss]

Anthony

I think you are being a bit naive. I too was very cautious about using them but if you get the right operator on the gas is should be as effective.  The big problem, as you pointed, out is the lack of heat and smoke that normally comes with “proper” fires.

Because of the environmental issues we do need to look at these alternatives, it now seems that the trainer needs to be trained in how to simulate the fire correctly to get the "real" effect.

Simon

[Ken Taylor]

Please don't get me wrong, Dave. I agree with Chris on the risk assessment approach and the suggested 3 year training interval with one year refresher for low risk office type workplaces. I was trying to make the point that, although there is no stated training frequency in law, there is a requirement for competence and that an argument for an absolute maximum or 'bottom-line' of 3 years for any workplace could be made from a consideration of the current requirement for first-aid at work training. Personally, I wonder how many workplaces even achieve that standard. I have been involved with both fire and first-aid training for fire marshals and first-aiders over many years and, while both are of great importance, would contend that, on balance, there is more information to be retained in first-aid and, consequently, more evidence of less retention as time passes following training.

[jamestcs]

i just come accross a new product called
  ( http://www.asiairas.com)

Is the same rules and regulations apply on this new product too ?

[AnthonyB]

This product is not new, but a development of an idea over 125 years old. it is a upgrading of the old fire grenade such as the famous Harden Star & Red Comet copying the two forms of action - manual application to fire & automatic fixed actuation.

The main changes are that Brine & CTC are replaced by ABC Powder and that actuation by breaking the glass grenade shell replaced by some form of detonator (not the first  use of the principle, the Antifyre pistol of the 40s & 50s based around triggering a charge similar to a blank shotgun cartridge)

I can't see it catching on widely here, although no doubt if it appears in the UK it will end up in some homes and small businesses due to some "creative marketing" like in the late 80's where some enterprising person revived another 100+ year old idea - the dry powder shaker tube.

It would still require appropriate training, although practice might be cheaper as you could get staff to practice lobbing a bowls ball into a wastepaper bin from a set distance......!