Fire compartments in respect of fire aalrm sounders

[Wiz]

However your rambling answer to my question has not defeated me, only bewildered me!?

You should have seen the first draft before I hit reply and not submit!

I would disagree with the comment regarding a single door not restricting sound, these new fangled addressable sounders dont travel through doors the way the dedicated sounders and bells seemed to previously.

Well I'm obviously talking about 'the dedicated sounders and bells'

[Wiz]

Just checked BS5588 part 1- it does not have a definition of a fire compartment. The definition in approved document B is Compartment(fire)- a building or part of a building, comprising one or more rooms spaces or storeys, constructed to prevent the spread of fire to or from another part of the same building......

So the BS5839 clause Wiz quoted is by no means the whole story. The design fire stategy of the building will determine how far this clause is to be applied.

Prof., the whole story of my question is should we be installing an alarm warning sounder in each room since it could be considered a fire compartment?

[Wiz]

Does anyone out there know the BS definition of a fire compartment?

Hi Wiz
This is the BS definition of Fire Compartment ( extract BS4422 latest)
An enclosed space, which may be subdivided/separated from adjoining spaces within the building by elements
of construction having a specified fire resistance

Kurnal, I see some parts of the 5588 series do give a defintion of fire compatment and some parts don't.

Ricardooooooooooo, thanks for your reply.

Based on the definition of a 'fire compartment' that you have provided, and applying it to the 5839 recommendation I initially mentioned, it would seem that a fire alarm sounder needs to be installed in each room even if the sounder pressure level test is sufficient without a sounder in the room!

Would anyone like to disagree before I rush out and buy vast shares in Cooper Lighting, Cranford and Klaxon!

[Benzerari]

That's why BS5839 needs a special 'Fire Dictionary' or 'Fire Glossary'!

Fire compartment could be 'Fire Section' = fire room, fire partition...etc

other than that I don't know

Benz, 5839-1 2002 does contain a section entitled 'terms and definitions' with 63 entries, but not an entry for 'fire compartment'

You may propose it to BS committee, so next time they review BS5839 part 1, they may take it into consideration, and introduce it into the ‘terms and definitions’ section, they may first reply with:

                      ‘Thank you, we welcome comments from professionals, in the field...etc’

[kurnal]

No Wiz - in any case not every room has fire resisting construction separating it from other rooms. Not every floor is a compartment floor- very few of them are in some builings.

I would think it sensible to provide a minimum of one sounder in each fire compartment (as understood in the Approved Document B or BS5588 where specified or BS whatever,) where the fire alarm system is designed to cover those compartments in accordance with the fire strategy and the emergency plan.

The reason for saying this is that the compartmentation lines will invariably co-incide with fire alarm zones, so for resilience of the alarm system and because the elements of structure used to create fire compartments will attenuate the sound levels considerably. Then theres other issues like a staged or phased alarm system will be based around evacuation of compartments.

Thats me common sense answer. I will take a look at the wording of the BS later tonight and see if I can find you the technically correct answer that your diligence deserves.

[Wiz]

No Wiz - in any case not every room has fire resisting construction separating it from other rooms. Not every floor is a compartment floor- very few of them are in some builings.

I would think it sensible to provide a minimum of one sounder in each fire compartment (as understood in the Approved Document B or BS5588 where specified or BS whatever,) where the fire alarm system is designed to cover those compartments in accordance with the fire strategy and the emergency plan.

The reason for saying this is that the compartmentation lines will invariably co-incide with fire alarm zones, so for resilience of the alarm system and because the elements of structure used to create fire compartments will attenuate the sound levels considerably. Then theres other issues like a staged or phased alarm system will be based around evacuation of compartments.

Thats me common sense answer. I will take a look at the wording of the BS later tonight and see if I can find you the technically correct answer that your diligence deserves.

Prof., thank you for your attention to my query.

Just a couple of points about your last reply.

Obviously it is sensible to install a fire alarm sounder in every fire compartment. This is not the question. Indeed the fire alarm engineers 'bible', BS5839, says we have to!

The question is just what constitutes a fire compartment and how do we recognise it.

Also, your answer talks about 'fire alarm zones' following compartment boundaries. If by this you mean 'detection zones', I would suggest that BS 5839 fire does not actually recommend detection zones follow fire compartment boundaries, in fact it makes no mention whatsoever of the fire-resistance of 'detection zone' boundaries!

If your term 'fire alarm zones' means 'alarm zones' (although this has nothing to do with my original question) then BS recommends only that the boundaries for these comprise of 'fire-resisting construction' and not that these boundaries are those of 'fire compartments' in the terms that you are describing them as having.

Having now looked for the use of the term of 'fire compartment' in other recommendations of BS5839, it would appear that there is no clear precise definition of it that can be worked out from those recommendations. It would also appear to me that the term is often used to describe an area with boundaries of any level of fire resistance, so if this is the case, then in light of my original question it would appear that BS is quite clearly recommending an alarm sounder in every room!

[kurnal]

It would also appear to me that the term is often used to describe an area with boundaries of any level of fire resistance, so if this is the case, then in light of my original question it would appear that BS is quite clearly recommending an alarm sounder in every room!

No Dr Wiz it absolutely and definately is not saying that.
Our good friend Monsieur Ricardo correctly pointed out that there is a BS 4422 that provides the official vocabulary for fire safety terms in relation to fire alarm systems. This was last revised in 2005 and the link on the BSI website is no longer available, but the previous version is still there to be seen

http://www.bsi-global.com/en/Shop/Publication-Detail/?pid=000000000000216671

At the time BS5839 was last updated the 1990 version of BS4422 would have been  current , and it is in this document that the appropriate definition was set out.

Now making sense of that definition is not straightforward because whilst the Building Regulations Approvd Documents, and the equivalent design templates such as the old BS5588 or for hospitals the HTMs set out basic recommendations for the subdivision of a building into compartments, Other interests may also influence and vary this  including engineered solutions and insurance requirements.

Thats why its absolutely vital for each new building to have a predetermined fire strategy upon which the fire alarm designer will base their fire alarm design.

Sorry I was a little flippant and careless with my responses yesterday, was giving off the cuff responses rather than fully considered answers. Hope this has helped a little this time.   I think we both need double medication tonight.

[colin todd]

People are reading way too much into this recommendation, which does not, as suggested, say you have to, as all of BS 5839-1 is only a set of recommendations. Forget the definition of fire compartment as it will not really help here. This is just a throwaway line that meant people to use a bit of common sense and not, say, within a big open plan floor or an entire floor of a biggish building put just one sounder even if it might just about reach the SPL, so that there was not total dependence on a single sounder. Now that there is a product standard for sounders, it is probably debatable as to how strictly this RECOMMENDATION need be interpreted in any case, particularly if the sounders are solid state devices.

[Wiz]

People are reading way too much into this recommendation, which does not, as suggested, say you have to, as all of BS 5839-1 is only a set of recommendations. Forget the definition of fire compartment as it will not really help here. This is just a throwaway line that meant people to use a bit of common sense and not, say, within a big open plan floor or an entire floor of a biggish building put just one sounder even if it might just about reach the SPL, so that there was not total dependence on a single sounder. Now that there is a product standard for sounders, it is probably debatable as to how strictly this RECOMMENDATION need be interpreted in any case, particularly if the sounders are solid state devices.

Colin, I think you may have misunderstood the original point that I made. In fact, you appear to be looking at in quite the reverse way from what I was originally suggesting.

I was not saying the recommendation was for only one sounder not matter the size of the room, but instead that every room might need at least one sounder based on the recommendation of BS 5839 part 1 2002 Clause 16.2.1 i)  - At least one sounder should be provided in each fire compartment.

This was based on the premise that each room might be considered a fire compartment!

I fully take on board the point about 'recommendations' and I will be responding to Professor Kurnal's last post after this, and hopefully this will explain, more fully, the main reason for my original post. and why your comment; 'People are reading way too much into this recommendation....' is spot on!

[Wiz]

It would also appear to me that the term is often used to describe an area with boundaries of any level of fire resistance, so if this is the case, then in light of my original question it would appear that BS is quite clearly recommending an alarm sounder in every room!

No Dr Wiz it absolutely and definately is not saying that.
Our good friend Monsieur Ricardo correctly pointed out that there is a BS 4422 that provides the official vocabulary for fire safety terms in relation to fire alarm systems. This was last revised in 2005 and the link on the BSI website is no longer available, but the previous version is still there to be seen

http://www.bsi-global.com/en/Shop/Publication-Detail/?pid=000000000000216671

At the time BS5839 was last updated the 1990 version of BS4422 would have been  current , and it is in this document that the appropriate definition was set out.

Now making sense of that definition is not straightforward because whilst the Building Regulations Approvd Documents, and the equivalent design templates such as the old BS5588 or for hospitals the HTMs set out basic recommendations for the subdivision of a building into compartments, Other interests may also influence and vary this  including engineered solutions and insurance requirements.

Thats why its absolutely vital for each new building to have a predetermined fire strategy upon which the fire alarm designer will base their fire alarm design.

Sorry I was a little flippant and careless with my responses yesterday, was giving off the cuff responses rather than fully considered answers. Hope this has helped a little this time.   I think we both need double medication tonight.

Prof., the double medication you suggested kicked in this morning and resulted in me being in an unfit state to reply to you until now!

I must take issue with your comment " No Dr Wiz it absolutely and definately is not saying that.".
I believe that the problem is that it definately appears to be saying that, although I agree it probably doesn't mean to say that !  And this is why I started the thread!

I never really thought the BS meant to recommend a sounder in every room, but I am suggesting the use of the words 'in every fire compartment' could easily be understood as 'every room' since many people would consider, and even other BS recommendations intimate, that a room can be a fire compartment!

The lack of a clear definition of what constitutes a 'fire compartment' in this BS is partly due to no definition being provided in the Terms and Definitions section of the BS.

Furthermore, 'Googled' searches for definitions provides answers that conflict with your defintion.

Furthermore, your link leads to a list of fire system definitions that has been withdrawn!

How can anyone know what a fire compartment means in this recommendation?

I am not disagreeing with your understanding of this BS recommendation, in fact I feel you must be absolutely correct. However I maintain that the recommendation is confusing and that is actually why I originally highlighted it and offered it open for discussion.

Hopefully, the discussion has reduced some of the potential confusion, although I doubt this is the case since the 'fire compartment' definition has not really been resolved.

I'm now off to the banter bar to partake in a double-dose of absinthe and lucozade - Please serve it to me in tall cocktail glass, old chap!

[colin todd]

Wiz. I know you were not suggesting that there be one sounder on a floor-I was trying to explain that the wording is intended simply to prevent anyone from doing something quite so nonsensical. The definition of fire compartment under building regs and BS 4422 etc is all really irrelevant. The recommendation was never meant to be quite that precise. It was simply meant to be a commonsense bit of general guidance. BS 5839-1 is not designed to be a precise specification, though it was made much closer to one in 2002 by use of practice specification format. But there are still some points of guidance that are just that, and that are not intended to be taken as literally as people are trying to take them. Trust me on this!

[kurnal]

Ah Wiz! Do you not see that is is but a fiendish plot by those who write the standards to ensure a regular and steady income for themselves as expert witnesses when the meaning is tested in court.

Otherwise you are absolutely right. Some overpaid barrister whose only interest is winning the case for their client irresepective of the rights and wrongs will latch upon such wording and confusion inherent in all of the standards, guidance and legislation and will exploit those of us who have to stand on our own to feet and work for a living trying to understand the mess, We have to determine  what is a reasonable and appropriate standard for that particular installation or situation.  

We have to work at the front end and apply forsight - whereas this will then be tested and examined by those who have the benefit of hindsight and all the time in the world to examine our decisions in minutae at our expense.

Meanwhile the BSI, ISO et al think they are doing the world a service by churning out endless and overpriced standards and guidance that are in fact full of holes, errors, confusion and mistakes and incapaple of clear interpretation.

Trouble is few can afford to buy them all, none of us who have to go out there and earn an honest crust by actually doing some work at the sharp end can afford the time to absorb and understand all the  ramifications - and market forces and clients pockets are always a further limiting factor.

I dont think I have ever seen a fire alarm installation that conforms to BS5839 part 1 in total never mind the interpretations that could be placed upon it.
I continue to rely my naive belief in common sense and my (not insubstantial) gut feelings, together with a smattering of experience to do my job and hopefully hit the benchmark standard to keep me out of jail.

[Wiz]

Wiz. I know you were not suggesting that there be one sounder on a floor-I was trying to explain that the wording is intended simply to prevent anyone from doing something quite so nonsensical. The definition of fire compartment under building regs and BS 4422 etc is all really irrelevant. The recommendation was never meant to be quite that precise. It was simply meant to be a commonsense bit of general guidance. BS 5839-1 is not designed to be a precise specification, though it was made much closer to one in 2002 by use of practice specification format. But there are still some points of guidance that are just that, and that are not intended to be taken as literally as people are trying to take them. Trust me on this!

Colin. Thanks for your reply.

I take on-board everything you have said about the BS recommendations being guidance and not everything should be taken literally, but it is these recommendations that the 'jobsworths' refer to when they are picking holes in a design or installation.

In respect of the recommendation that these posts refer to, i.e BS 5839 part 1 2002 Clause 16.2.1 i)  - At least one sounder should be provided in each fire compartment. I would now respectfully suggest that this recommendation is at the very least confusing and, based on your comments, probably superfluous.

Since the other BS recommendations relating to minimum sound pressure, automatically ensures that there should be enough alarm warning sounders in all areas of the building, then the confusing superfluous recommendation "At least one sounder should be provided in each fire compartment" might now need to be removed from future revisions. (please note that this opinion is not meant to be disrespectful to those who originally included this recommendation!)

[Wiz]

Ah Wiz! Do you not see that is is but a fiendish plot by those who write the standards to ensure a regular and steady income for themselves as expert witnesses when the meaning is tested in court.

Otherwise you are absolutely right. Some overpaid barrister whose only interest is winning the case for their client irresepective of the rights and wrongs will latch upon such wording and confusion inherent in all of the standards, guidance and legislation and will exploit those of us who have to stand on our own to feet and work for a living trying to understand the mess, We have to determine  what is a reasonable and appropriate standard for that particular installation or situation.  

We have to work at the front end and apply forsight - whereas this will then be tested and examined by those who have the benefit of hindsight and all the time in the world to examine our decisions in minutae at our expense.

Meanwhile the BSI, ISO et al think they are doing the world a service by churning out endless and overpriced standards and guidance that are in fact full of holes, errors, confusion and mistakes and incapaple of clear interpretation.

Trouble is few can afford to buy them all, none of us who have to go out there and earn an honest crust by actually doing some work at the sharp end can afford the time to absorb and understand all the  ramifications - and market forces and clients pockets are always a further limiting factor.

I dont think I have ever seen a fire alarm installation that conforms to BS5839 part 1 in total never mind the interpretations that could be placed upon it.
I continue to rely my naive belief in common sense and my (not insubstantial) gut feelings, together with a smattering of experience to do my job and hopefully hit the benchmark standard to keep me out of jail.

Prof. K. I fully agree with your comments.

I promise to come and visit you in prison, unless, of course, I am in a different prison myself at the same time!

In fact half of the Firenet population might all be rounded up and imprisoned 'for failure to understand the authority's 'official jobsworth' representative's own interpretation of the multitude of daily-issued confusing laws, recommendations and guidance documents'

[GregC]

Since the other BS recommendations relating to minimum sound pressure, automatically ensures that there should be enough alarm warning sounders in all areas of the building,

This is what I was trying to convay earlier in the thread but now I am beginning to question if the clause was to ensure the loss of a sounder (through fault or malice) outside the "fire compartment" so that it did not affect the audibility inside the "fire compartment"