Fighting codehuggers

[Wiz]

I have noticed that Colin Todd's comments in this forum in respect of queries regarding BS recommendations often suggests that commonsense and experience be used when applying the recommendations.

However, the BS 5839 Part 1 model commissioning certificate clearly requests a commissioning engineer to confirm various aspects of a system 'comply' with the recommendations.

This requirement gives no scope to apply commonsense to 'minor infringements'.

I know that there is the 'variation' route available. But the customer is looking for a commissioning certificate that confirms the system is 'perfect' and not one with a whole list of minor failures to meet the recommendations. Also to seek approval invariably includes the agreement of an insurance company and, on the basis that they are unlikely to have much experience of fire alarms, it is easier (and puts no risk on them) to demand exact compliance with a BS recommendation rather than agree a variation.

I would suggest a system where the commissioning engineer could 'grade' the 'infringements such as;

A - Minor infringement which the commissiong engineer suggests is not a problem.

B - Minor infringement which the commissioning engineer suggests requires a variation be considered

C - Major infringement which the commissioning engineer suggests requires immediate attention.


Comments please.

[Galeon]

Wiz ,
The biggest problem that I encounter is where you supply and commission , slightest bit of aggro on the commissioning sheet and what an opportunity for them not wanting to pay their bill.

However saying that I like what you have put forward and it makes sense , and I cant see why you couldn't implement this to your paperwork anyhow.

[colin todd]

The variations recorded by the commissioning engineer only relate to clause 39-ie variations from the recommendations on commissioning. They do not relate to variations in design.

[Thomas Brookes]

Doesn't the commissioning engineer commission against the design specification.

I.e the designs are supplied to the commissioning engineer, they will then certify the system comply's with the category that has been specified and agreed with all parties at the design stage.
Surely the commissioning is the final check to ensure the system is what the client has ordered, and the designer has specified.

I can not see how the commissioning engineer can possibly have descression on if the system has minor infringements or major ones. As long as the design was correct in the first place, the commissioning engineers job is to check it does and is what it is supposed to do and is.

[Graeme]

BS recommends that the com engineer inspects that the install is up to an adequate standard but not to verify the design or installation work.

I have been told on the FIA advanced commissioning course (which i did not agree with) to inspect all aspect of the install,including opening up any joint boxes etc.

I would go with test to the design and list anyting that differs from it and inform of any blatantly obvious non complainces in the install that you can see without having to lift floors or open up joint boxes etc.

I mentioned at the course that what is the point of having the designer and installers sign a certifiacte to say that they have done their part to the standard for the com engineer to have to check it. They have signed to say it complies,so the responsibilty should lie with them.

[kurnal]

How often are you asked to commission a system for which no design certificate is available?
And worst still systems that have been specced by architects drawing nice circles on plans and electricians installing as they think fit?
Big jobs or little,  more often than not when I carry out fire risk assessments none of the certificates are available- fire alarm, emergency lighting, electrical and gas systems, sprinklers and fixed installations. And thats usually when the place is up and running. So I have a lot of sympathy with Wiz's position cos I am often in the same boat with a different hat on and a few weeks aftwer Wiz has had to make the same decisions. And I am not just talking about small jobs - was working in a big  new shopping centre in London last week and the same applied.

[Graeme]

How often are you asked to commission a system for which no design certificate is available?

everytime  no lie

[AnthonyB]

Even when I find a certificate it rarely has a category on it so even on a new build/refurb I have to go around spotting heads......

[Wiz]

The variations recorded by the commissioning engineer only relate to clause 39-ie variations from the recommendations on commissioning. They do not relate to variations in design.

yes Colin, I understand that is the way it might have been intended, but I maintain that many of the clauses under 39.2.C in respect of siting of equipment etc impacts on what the system designers and installers may have done.The commissioning engineer has no option but to highlight every non-compliance, no matter how small.

Furthermore 39.2.C.24) specifically relates to system design considerations, and whilst note 3 attempts to reduce the impact of highlighting design 'problems', in reality anything highlighted is taken as a personal 'slight' by the designer. .

So the Designer and  installer don't take kindly to the commissioning engineer pointing out, for example, that it was impossible to achieve 7.5m spacing of smoke detectors in an area that the designer showed on his drawing as having, say, three smoke detectors, and the installer has done the best he could, but achieved a distance of 7.6m. In these circumstances the 0.1m probably is insignificant, but the BS model commissioning process leaves no leeway for it to be ignored as a 'minor infringement'.

Everybody wants a commissioning certificate that infers 'the system is absolutely perfect' and the commissioning engineer gets the aggravation because it is not!

Even a single variation mentioned on a commissioning certificate is not acceptable to the enduser/customer, they consider anything highlighted as a failure by the designer or the installer to do his job properly and they, invariably, in turn, blame the commissioner, for highlighting it!

[Wiz]

Doesn't the commissioning engineer commission against the design specification.....
...........

In-depth design specifications are rarely available to a commissioning engineer. The most he can hope for is a category designation.

......I can not see how the commissioning engineer can possibly have descression on if the system has minor infringements or major ones. .........

Anyone who is a commissioning engineer must understand all aspects of the equipment operation and the BS recommendations. One would assume he is highly experienced in fire alarm and detection systems, and should therefore have the experience to be able point out on the commissioning certificate that a smoke detector mounted 490mm from a wall, whilst not complying exactly with the BS recommendation, is unlikely to cause a major problem.

[Wiz]

Wiz ,
The biggest problem that I encounter is where you supply and commission , slightest bit of aggro on the commissioning sheet and what an opportunity for them not wanting to pay their bill.

However saying that I like what you have put forward and it makes sense , and I cant see why you couldn't implement this to your paperwork anyhow.

Galeon, some codehuggers I have met (normally fire officers or council employees) wouldn't accept a commissioning certificate unless it is a photocopied copy of the BS5839 model rather than something based on it and certainly not with my own additions to it!

I have always managed to shake them off by demanding a written letter from them stating that the BS model certificate is the only document they recognise, and further that they therefore idemnify me against any legal action that might result from my abuse of any BS copyright issues!

[Wiz]

How often are you asked to commission a system for which no design certificate is available?
And worst still systems that have been specced by architects drawing nice circles on plans and electricians installing as they think fit?
Big jobs or little,  more often than not when I carry out fire risk assessments none of the certificates are available- fire alarm, emergency lighting, electrical and gas systems, sprinklers and fixed installations. And thats usually when the place is up and running. So I have a lot of sympathy with Wiz's position cos I am often in the same boat with a different hat on and a few weeks aftwer Wiz has had to make the same decisions. And I am not just talking about small jobs - was working in a big  new shopping centre in London last week and the same applied.

Kurnal, I don't think there is anything in BS that recommends that an installer or commissioner needs to see a Design certificate before they can commence their works. It might be nice, but you can't insist on it because BS 'says so'

The things that are absolutely critical for a commissioning engineer, but still often ignored, are confirmation of the system category designation, standby battery capacity design information, details of pre-agreed variations, any 'cause and effect' function details and, possibly, any design specification details confirming any precise requirements where BS otherwise allows options.