Smoke detectors in smoking bedrooms of student flats

[Rocha]

I have recently been involved in a site, where smoke detection has been specified to be installed to all student bedrooms, including those designated for smoking.  This is the same arrangement as their other halls of residence, none of which have resulted in an unacceptable level of false alarms.

If activated, there is no pre alarm or delay of the signal, but will result in full evacuation of approximately 35 students.

Is it correct to say that cigarette smoke is unliklely to activate a smoke detector within the bedroom, and is therefore acceptable.

I would appreciate any comments.

R

[John Webb]

Rocha,
My experience is that you may get away with the occasional cigarette, particularly in warmer weather when there is likely to be ventilation. But I think if you have a chain-smoker in the middle of winter in one of these rooms there is a real risk of building up sufficient levels of smoke to actuate the detector. Maybe the student will then be persuaded by his/her fellow students to desist if this happens a few times!
Is there is also the risk of deliberate actuation by people deliberately blowing smoke into a detector?
And what is the acceptable rate of "unwanted" alarms? I would be concerned that people may get to the point where they start ignoring alarms because there have been too many - "it's only so-and-so smoking again".
Other than a complete ban on smoking (and cooking?) or the substitution of a muti-sensor detector such as smoke and heat sensing combined, you might be heading for problems.

[Graeme]

As John mentions. Multisensors for Student accomodation without doubt.

I have some where they also have a sink which the hot tap is often left running.

[Big T]

In addition Toast is often a student issue. (couple of rounds of toast after a couple of rounds down the union.)

False alarm accross MOD property is always toast and rarely smoke and they have single point smoke detection in all accomodation rooms.

Multisensors would be ideal

[Mr. P]

Recommend multi head dets which change from heat at night to smoke during day.  Obviously a bit more expensive and would need compatible panel set up. But works pretty good cutting down on false alarms.

[afterburner]

The smoking issue normally is normally thought through as a smoker, not smokers, but it is common to have several smokers socialising in one room. Second issue, they may not be smoking tobacco. there are some recreational smokeable substances which produce slightly different products of combustion. Detectors which have an inbuilt tolerance to tobacco smoke may have no tolerance to multi-smokers and their smoking habits.
Forgive the unintended slur if none of your students smoke anything but tobacco

[Rocha]

Thanks everyone for your comments, I think all opinion is pretty well along the same lines.

R

[messy]

Wouldn't plain old heat detectors be sufficient?

After all, if they are good enough for Hotel bedrooms, then surely they'd do the job in student bedrooms?

[wee brian]

I'm with messy - keep things in perspective.

[Graeme]

Wouldn't plain old heat detectors be sufficient?

After all, if they are good enough for Hotel bedrooms, then surely they'd do the job in student bedrooms?

not all FB's accept them in bedrooms.

[messy]

I am not sure whether any Fire Authority stupid enough to serve an enforcement notice, would successfully win any appeal against the provision of HD in bedrooms.

After all, we have supposed to have transferred responsibility for fire safety to the Responsible Person, and if s/he points to BS5839 (as a recognised national standard) and the numerous very large hotels which have adopted HD in bedrooms, I'd find it difficult to believe any court would find against the RP

[wee brian]

It isnt up to the FB its down to risk assessment - There seem to be two sorts of enforcement going on at the moment.

1 - FRSs who have just given up and left everything to the reponsible person

2 - FRSs who are charging about like a bull in a china shop insisting on unnecessary foire protection.

Has anybody found any that are in the middle?

[Jason Miller]

Messy

Although some big hotels have put HDs in, I'd hope I'm never sleeping in room protected by a HD. The fire would be unlikely to disturb my beauty sleep and, whilst I need lots of beauty sleep, I'd rather be woken by a quick alarm activation.

Aren't hotels placesof work? So, wouldn't smoking be banned making HDs not neccesary?

Jason

[jokar]

BS 5839 part 1 2002 recommends the installation of HD in hotel bedrooms and not SD.  The most sensible option at the moment is a multisensor detector.  There is provision in the smoking legislation for some places to continue to allow for smoking.

[David Rooney]

Messy

Although some big hotels have put HDs in, I'd hope I'm never sleeping in room protected by a HD. The fire would be unlikely to disturb my beauty sleep and, whilst I need lots of beauty sleep, I'd rather be woken by a quick alarm activation.

Aren't hotels placesof work? So, wouldn't smoking be banned making HDs not neccesary?

Jason

Unfortunately, if the fire starts in your room...... the BS considers you expendible....!!!