BWF fire door short video

[CivvyFSO]

I am not saying you are wrong, just looking for a good answer... What are you basing the unlikeliness of flashover within 15 minutes on? If we use HD as you like to suggest, then we are not picking a fire up in it's infancy, we are looking at something reasonably well developed before the alarm goes off. Due to this, the standard medium growth t² fire is surely a reasonable assumption?

(I am not arguing as such, I am giving you the opportunity to change my mind. And I am claiming 10 minutes CPD for this) 

[bungle]

Just a thought.... It's highly likely any windows in the room will be non fire rated such that they will fail well before the doors so allowing a large quantity of the smoke and heat to escape .

Bungle

[CivvyFSO]

A window failing might also mean flashover happens sooner.

[jokar]

Are you sure you can get flashover conditions in a well ventilated area?

[CivvyFSO]

Yes I am. Unless it is so well ventilated that the room will not reach 600C.

[colin todd]

Civvy, even if there were a pre movement time of 15 minutes, which I would dispute in any case, that will still leave 15-20 minutes before the titchy we flame appears. Am I bovvered about that-not in the least. Where are the deaths over the last 50 years to justify this expense? Chat to some of the old hands in your F&RS, particularly the operational ones. Ask them how often people have died because the door wasnt 30 minutes. While you are there (if you can be bothered talking to old fire officers, which I hereby give you absolution if you cant) ask them how often in their operational experience they have seen a blown intumescent strip and in what circs. First Minister Retty will confirm all this I suspect.

[kurnal]

If an fire risk assessor, wishing to achieve a listing on a register such as that for example operated by the IFE, expressed such arguments as:

We dont need to upgrade existing fire doors without seals in hotels because nobody has ever died as a result of the lack of a seal, or

upgrading  heat detectors to smoke detection in hotel bedrooms is always a Bad Thing, or

An accoustic- triggered  door hold open device on a fire door which protects the only staircase in a small hotel is fine because its most unlikely that both power supplies to the fire alarm will fail simultaneously, or

A mix of sounders is fine because persons will hear one signal  and respond to it, it does not matter if the sound changes as they make their escape and are unlikely to turn back, or

It doesnt matter if the emergency escape lighting batteries are only rated at 30 minutes because all relevant persons should be out of the building long before then etc etc etc......

What is their chance of success do you think?

[Tom Sutton]

Where are the deaths over the last 50 years to justify this expense? Chat to some of the old hands in your F&RS, particularly the operational ones. Ask them how often people have died because the door wasn’t 30 minutes.

CT I cannot speak for the last fifty years but can for the last forty and I suspect the reason for the good record on fire deaths especially on the introduction of the FPA was because of the adequate passive fire protection in certain commercial buildings, hotels for instance. The doors were either very solidly built or they were fire doors with inch rebates but no intumescent strips. At that time, or maybe a little latter, you were writing in the FPA journal telling us how expensive the fire precautions were and absolutely not cost effective. Incidentally I have experience of jobs, in domestic property, were down stairs doors have failed and people have died up stairs.

p.s. You were Fire Prevention Officer Baiting in those days.

[CivvyFSO]

Where are the deaths over the last 50 years to justify this expense?

I wasn't aware we needed to have had deaths to justify safety measures. If nobody has died due to smoking in petrol stations, does that mean that they can save money by not buying 'no smoking' signs?

How many deaths can be attributed purely to having no risk assessment? If a premises has good procedures, good means of escape etc but no risk assessment, would you advise them that the risk assessment is actually a waste of money, or would you happily get them booked in for the assessment?

[CivvyFSO]

Civvy, even if there were a pre movement time of 15 minutes, which I would dispute in any case

Dispute it all you want, it is straight out of a British Standard, with over 20mins suggested for a badly managed example.

[colin todd]

TW: I am confused by your posting which seems to be slightly contradictory, but if I get it right you are saying that old fire doors did a good job, without intumescent strips. In this case we are in agreement.

Kurnal, Your selection of suggestions is a mixed bag, but suffice it to say I did indeed interview some very experienced fire officers not long ago, and asked all of them about some of the things to which you refer. In some of the examples you give I can say categorically that the IFE would be likely to register the persons in question. In some they would not. I think it inappropriate to tell you which are which. But certainly, it is unlikely that the IFE would reject people who base their risk assessments on an assessment of risk. Equally, I know of one occasion where someone was rejected for being over prescriptive without any consideration of risk whatsoever, and since I did the interview in conjunction with one of the finest officers in the finest F&RS in a large metropolitan city, I feel sure the conclusion must have been correct. I hope that this answers your question.

Civvy, Thank you for the permission to dispute something in a somewhat esoteric and not always well founded BS, and the implied permission to take the circumstances into account, rather than following a text book as a result of lack of practical experience. In return, I give you the promised absolution for not talking to experienced fire officers, who I acknowledge can be a real pain to talk to, but sometimes have experience of fires (though with CFS less and less so, but best not tell the FBU or they will get all worried).

TW: you confuse baiting with a desire to make people think, which I know can bring on headaches and other side effects but sometimes prevents people from doing silly things. It is nice of you to acknowledge that I have been consistent in making my small contribution to this and I hope to continue to do so in the rapidly approaching twilight of my life. Buy shares in Nurofen now, as there will be a run on them soon

[Graeme]

With regards to the princess and myself strange as it may seem,I haven't the faintest idea what type of detectors were in the bedrooms of the hotel in question as taking an interest in that was not on my priority list.

when alone

mini bar priority then adult channel... then i may take a wee peek up at the detector to see who covered it with what before me.. 

[Tom Sutton]

Sorry CT if I confused you, I know I confuse myself most of the time. What I was trying to say was that people didn’t die because, FPO’s at that time aimed to provide full half hour MOE routes and consequently the doors had to achieve a full half hour standard which meant the use of inch rebates. When intumescent strips were introduced it was considered that inch rebates were not required and in fact inhibited the effectiveness of the strips. So in my opinion you are unlikely to achieve a full half hour standard with out intumescent strips unless you are prepared to go back to the old standards. If you apply ASET principles and calculate times less than 30 minutes you still have to provide the minimum standard of 30minutes. If then you try to modify the door by not including intumescent strips then the fire resistance of the door becomes pure guesswork.

As for your last paragraph I believe you but thousands might not and I agree fully by challenging people you make people think very much deeper, which is good, because we all have too many pre conceived ideas which sometimes we are reluctant to modify.

[colin todd]

tw: you are making it all too comlicated. A 30 minute door is a 30 minute door, proven by test, It is simply a matter of practical fact that you dont get 30 mins without the strip. Going back to old standards would not give 30 minutes to the modern test. The test standard was changed in 1972-thats the reason for the strip, not any suggestion that old doors were deficient. New doors should be 30 minutes, and so have strips. Old doors are not as you suggest unchartered territory-they are 15-20 minutes IN THE BS TEST WHICH CRUDELY REPRESENTS POST FLASHOVER. Since detection in the room operates before flashover, you have 20 minutes plus for evacuation of the floor of origin. By that time who cares.

[jokar]

All out by the time both veerses of the National Anthem have been played.  Job done. ignition, growth, flashover, decay, backdraught.  Who cares, all out let it burn.  FRS then do defensive firefighting until another car park is formed.