BSEN 54 Vs BS5839

[kurnal]

I wonder if any of you techie guys can help me to find a simple overview of where we are in respect of BSEN54?

I received a tender overview briefing document for initial comment this morning. The proposed building is a warehouse in England with full detector coverage and a mix of multi sensor and aspirating systems. The electrical spec makes no reference to BSEN54 and quotes undated BS5839 throughout for the fire alarm and detection system ( including part 4 for the panel!)

So I started to reword things to create a simple paragraph pointing towards BSEN 54 and then realised I am not up to date with where we are with the standard. For example I know part 20 was recently launched- but are any systems available yet that comply?  

Can anybody point me towards a simple overview of where we are currently with regard to the relative standards please?

[Ricardo]

Kurnal

My understanding is that BS EN 54-5 & 7  represent heat and smoke respectively
BS EN 54-3 is the standard for audible alarm devices.
BS EN 54-2(CIE) & 4(power supplies)have replaced 5839 -4
BS EN-10 is for flame detectors
BS EN 54-11 is the standard for manual call points
Any use of non standard equipment would require agreement with all interseted parties and need to be recorded as a variation to satisfy BS 5839 part1 2002.
Hope some of this is of some use to you.

Not heard of BS EN 54-20, which product is this one for?

Regards

Ricardo

[kurnal]

Many thanks Ricardo.
See this link for news on EN54-20
http://www.fseonline.co.uk/articles.asp?article_id=3793

Dont ask me any hard  questions on it though- only stumbled across it today!!!

[Ricardo]

Thanks for that info Kurnal I am finding the site most interesting

[Ricardo]

Kurnal

more info on BS EN 54 if any use

1- introduction

12 - line detection using optical light beam

13 - compatibility assessment of system components

17 - short circuit isolators

18 - input/output devices

21 - alarm transmission & fault warning routing equipment

Regards

Ricardo

[David Rooney]

On a similar subject, I was told today by a panel manufacturer that 5839 was now officially superseded by EN54. Hence they could sell me a panel with no zonal LEDs.

Can someone please direct me to the official document that 5839 is no longer valid ?

Thanks....

[Chris Houston]

British Standard 5839:2002 is valid and is the relevant standard for the design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of Fire Detection and Alarm Systems in Buildings.  BS 5839 also recommends (for that's all it is, a series of recommendations) that components are design and approved to comply with EN 54.

Insurers require systems to BS 5839.  Complying with BS 5839 would be the simplest way of demonstrating to a court that your fire detection and alarm system is suitable, should the suitability of a system be questioned.

The panel manufacturer can sell you what he wants, he can sell you a weetabix packet filled with mince, you won't find any statute dictating compliance with BS 5839, it's up to each employer to decide how they comply with the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations, but one would probably find ones case much easier to make if one installed a system that was designed in accordance with the recommendations of BS 5839, it would therefore follow that the components used within the system complied with the standard and EN 54.

[kurnal]

Chris
Would that be mincibix??

Wont the Construction Products Directive require the use of EN54  compliant components before too long?
( 2009???)

[wee brian]

Not unless the UK changes its policy on implementation of the CPD. CE marking is "one way" to show compliance with the construction products regs.

[Chris Houston]

Wont the Construction Products Directive require the use of EN54  compliant components before too long?
( 2009???)

I won't lie; I don't know.

[Wiz]

On a similar subject, I was told today by a panel manufacturer that 5839 was now officially superseded by EN54. Hence they could sell me a panel with no zonal LEDs.

Can someone please direct me to the official document that 5839 is no longer valid ?

Thanks....

I was a bit disappointed that when BS5839 part 1 2002 was published that it, in some areas, it made recommendations that could not be met by equipment designed to the EN54 standard which was already in exsistance. Are we part of the European market or not?

An example, I understand, is that EN54 does not require addressable panels to have fire zone indicators whereas BS5839 part 1 2002 13.2.4 a) recommends that zone information should be given at the cie even if addressable text information is also available and 23.2.2 c) recommends that the form of zone indication should comprise a seperate led for each zone...

I understand that obviously EN54 requires fire zone indicators on non-addressable panels.

It has been suggested to me that the variances between BS5839 and EN54 mean that BS5839 is the 'tighter' standard and therefore you can do no 'wrong' in following it. However manufacturers have their eye on the European market and will obviously want to manufacture equipment they can sell EU-wide and are using the 'EN54 compliant' phrase as a selling point. So it would be easy for installer to buy 'EU approved' equipment that couldn't comply with BS. Very confusing!

However until someone tells us to the contrary, surely we must comply with BS5839 part 1 2002?

[Martin Burford]

Wis
Spot on !
Conqueror

[Chris Houston]

My understanding is that zone indicators are needed for various reasons:

They give fire fighters an (approximate) immediate idea of what percentage of the building is on fire.

Some text displays on addressable systems mean nothing to someone who does not know the building.  I troubles me to report that the majority of buildings I visit don't have the necessary plans next to the main panel.

A fire alarm sytem that doesn't tell the fire fighters where the fire is, is not much use.

If we have to reduce our high levels to a lower level that others do in the EU I image there would be outrage.

[Wiz]

Obviously fire zone indication is absolutely essential, but it appears that EN54 is saying that because it is invariably included in the text description of an addressable system, then that is sufficient indication. I actually think the BS5839 recommendation for led fire zone indication makes sense - I could imagine text messages being corrupted in some way during a fault whereas led indicators seem simpler and therefore more reliable.
What I can't understand is why there has to be differences, to confuse us all, in two standards that are meant to cover the same equipment in the same geographical area. I thought the idea was for harmonization.

[Graeme]

i find that the end user does not look at the zonal led's on the panel but the lcd first on an a/a system.
Never known for text to be corrupted due to a fault  only from incorrect programming.