Res Care Sprinklers v FR bedroom doors

[Guest]

I've recently had a proposal for a Res Care premises. Its large and the developer wants to install sprinklers but as a design freedom they want to omit fire resistance to the bedroom doors and sidescreens including not fitting self closers, even free swing. Given the effectiveness of fast response heads there will not be a large fire and logically not a lot of smoke. There will also be an L1 fire alarm of course plus zone separation and staircase protection. Any thoughts.

[Ian Currie]

What size zones and travel distances are you talking about? What level of care and staff presence at night? What evacuation strategy is proposed? Sprinklers in every room and cupboard where a fire can start?

I suppose that this is what the new building codes are all about (even here in Caledonia soon) and if you believe the architects data and safety cases and have boundless faith in a continuously high standard of management at all times during the life of the building then go for it. I believe in the fallability of all things however and prefer to see rather more robust and direct protection provided for people who are frequently completely dependant on the professionalism of others for their continued well-being. I would still go for fire doors with free swing closers to keep them relatively safe until the two night staff can get to them or the cavalry arrives.

[GL]

The zones have around 6/8 beds per zone although there is one with eleven. TD's are ok and at this time I must assume staffing levels and management will be what is required. My main concern lies in the fact that some smoke will get into the corridor and we all know how this affects old folk, their ability to cope with even very low levels of smoke is much less than normal. But if you consider that in a conventional home with a bedroom fire, will the amount of smoke getting into the corridor be less than a sprinklered home with a non self closing door given the effect of sprinklers?

[iang]

Have a look at the BASA Supplement to FP&FE Jornal.

[colin todd]

Yes, it will, particularly in the case of a smouldering fire. Free swing is the ideal answer.

[mike]

"I must assume staffing levels and management will be what is required."

This seemingly innocuous statement causes me some concern.

1. There are no required staffing levels for evacuation...only recomendations for TLC.

2. Management of these premises does not always have a very good record. Finance driven use of agency staff, (some of whom are undoubtably very caring), gives me concern that their familiarity with the premises can be questioned.

3. The movement towards residential/nursing homes offering a range of care packages has spread the level of occupant dependance through a wider section of the care community than previously.

4. The anticipated evacuation times , if necessary, are a joke. Don Christain, in his recent publication through  BSI, suggested that full evacuation of a compartment would need to take place within 50seconds. (Excluding pre-movement times). If he is right, and I believe he is, few care homes have proceedures and staffing levels to achieve this.

Finally, where is the report on the Rose Park fire? Why is it taking so long to be published? I may be a conspiracy nut, but it is taking an awlfully long time!

[holland]

Just a thought...
If we were to accept the installation of a suppression system in replacement of structural fr, would there be a justification for stating that should the suppression system be out of commission for whatever reason (testing, repair, maintenance etc) then it is unsafe to permit access to or use of the premises by the occupancy group concerned??

[wee brian]

Yes make all the old ladies move to another home until its on line again. This will of course cause more fatalities than fires do but safety must come first.

[colin todd]

As I recall HTM 84 does have staffing levels, and they do not relate to TLC.

[Ken Taylor]

Re-housing aside, I take it that the fire plan will include provision for the occasions when the sprinklers will be out of operation - like extra staff to assist evacuation?

Personally, this all seems risky. Whilst the self-closer issue may not be such a concern in new-build residential care where personal security tends to ensure that main entrance doors to flats are kept closed, the need for adequate compartmentation to enable relatively safe evacuation for the type of clients involved would seem essential if the sprinklers aren't working. Or am I just too old-fashioned?

[Brian Downes]

I have got a 1960's modular construction (open ceiling void) home that is installing a partial residential sprinkler system (DD251) into bedrooms to compensate for not structurally upgrading doors and partitions. You may need to take into account that the new BS 9251 does not advise fitting partial systems.
I still think this was the most effective and practical solution in my case.

[Brian Downes]

Omitted to mention that L1 AFD system is installed and staff training in bedroom door protocols needs to be to a high standard.