Fire safety Signs

[Davo]

Same difference, Jim


What about the suppliers then? If I get prosecuted cam I pass it on


davo

[Jim Creak]

Now that answer needs to be analysed.....Same difference? What does that actually mean?...Doesn't matter perhaps?

Colour green? Rectangular in shape?  Near enough?

Yes suppliers should be under trade description legislation. But in the bigger picture and in the realm of things it is very unlikely and probably a justifiable reason to just let confusion reign. OK

[Tom Sutton]

Jim if a RP insisted using the so called euro-sign with conforms to The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996 as a FRS would you be prepared to take him to court?

[Jim Creak]

If I were an FRS I would advise the RP that the fire safety means of escape signs do not conform and that in my professional opinion this is significant within the framework of the fire risk assessment. I would advise however that the RP has a choice and can do exactly as he wants, the RP is the only person that has this discretion however when the proverbial hits the fan the RP has to justify the decision and may be held liable. I would advise him that an RP is supposed to be competent to provide suitable arrangements if not the RP has an obligation to seek competent advice. The competent advice to satisfy both RRO and the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations would be to conform to a recognised Standard. If subsequently I were to be called as an expert witness I would have no trouble in discrediting any decision to use signs that do not conform. They are confusing, misunderstood and slow egress. The court would decide if that were negligent.

If the RP has sought professional advice from Designer, EL supplier or Safety Sign manufacturer I would advise him to seek redress and compensation for supplying product that does not conform to requirements.

[kurnal]

And if I were in the dock accused in accordance with your witness I could almost guarantee I could point to the illuminated exit sign at the rear of the public gallery and that would not comply either. Case dismissed.

I know two wrongs dont make a right Jim and I support your crusade but there is a huge mountain to climb and nobody to help carry your bags.

[Davo]

Jim

Here in West Yorkshire half the population seem to be european, indeed the Superdrug warehouse uses dual english/polish H & S signage.

Can you see the dilemma?

davo

[Jim Creak]

I am sure in an emergency the magistrate will still leave by another route. The concerns I have are present wherever signs are used that have no accreditation nor provenance regardless of where they are. Court of law or not If they are not understood they will have little or no influence. If you want to influence egress speed then communication should be precise and authorative not open to conjecture and possible misinterpretation.  If you wish to defend the status quo that's fine it is just not the competent decision. As I said before, In my opinion you should not play pictionary with peoples lives.

The adoption of ISO 7010 as a European Norm and the removal of the annex (illustrations) in EC Directive 92/58 will require the RP to audit and review the current situation and the Management of Health and Safety regulations requires the RP to impliment changes in technology and improvements for the prime objective of collective protection....This is a primary difference of the RRO over the prescriptive regime of certification under the old Fire Precaution Legislation.

[Midland Retty]

I think the problem Jim is two fold.

1) Signage isn't a trivial issue but it is much lower down on the list of priorities when it comes to other fire precautions

2) There isn't any overwhelming evidence to demonstrate that the signage is not being understood

I was responsible for managing fire safety at a site with multiple risk buildings, some had the so called euro signs, some buildings had BS signage, and some even had the HTM style signage.

I even printed off my own signs from time to time too. The signage wasn't drastically different. They were always the same colour (green for exit signs) with directional arrow, a running person, and a door in all examples.

When I used to do staff and visitor training , which included foreign nationals, they all understood the signage. So... I don't fully understand where the confusion is coming from, and whether it is such a big problem in the scheme of things.

[Jim Creak]

Research and testing carried out under ISO 9186 and previously by leading experts in Japan on graphical symbols and specifically for comprehension for escape route signs is overwhelming evidence that the so called Euro sign is not understood. LIF and ICEL had to withdraw technical support for the use of these signs in 1997 as a function of the concerns expressed over comprehension credentials.

My particular expertise is human behaviour, egress in escape so I concede that in terms of succesful outcome my priority will always be speed of egress, correct decision making and effective communication. I concede that the sign over the last door is irrelevant it is what happens between the start of evacuation and that point. The so called Euro Signs do not accomodate for this. All of the above have an influence on ASET which is fundamental for all provision.

The adoption of ISO 7010 as an EN and the removal of the annex to EC 82/58 will require implementation. That was the answer to the original question, what priority the RP's puts on this will be for them to decide. In my professional, competent opinion this should be sooner rather than later.

[Midland Retty]

Forgive my ignorance Jim, what was the source of confusion that ISO and other research found? Is it colour? Shapes? Pictograms? Is it possible to summarise their findings?

Im not knocking the issue, and it is clear you are passionate about it, but it is the first time I've been made aware of any significant issues with signage, to this degree.

[Jim Creak]

Within EC Directive 92/58 the Euro sign and UK legislation is illustrated in 5 different formats as prescribed...This is the first source of confusion. 5 different designs with a theoretical single use...very confusing..... the 5 different signs illustrated are composed of 2 and 3 elements.....in the case of the 2 element signs arrow and white rectangle in case of the 3 element signs moving person arrow and white rectangle. Whilst in practice most manufacturers, suppliers and specifiers have by intelect dismissed 3 of the illustrated signs without moving person which left 2 signs one with moving person arrow left and white rectangle, the other illustrated sign had moving person arrow pointing down and white rectangle. To make life more confusing the arrow giving direction of egress(this way) is supplementary to these sign illustrations. In comprehension testing intuitive meaning was extremely difficult when dealing with so many different graphical elements. Where as intuitive comprehension for means of escape signs on accordance with BS 5499 Part 4 were 100%

I apologise but this is most simple way of explaining the total confusion and why it is necessary to turn to the Standard BS 5499 Part 4 to satisfy fire safety signage requirements for means of escape provision.

[Midland Retty]

Still not sure I follow Jim

You say that most manufacturers produce signage with "three elements" - the running person, arrow and ice cream block (white rectangle) and then mention two specific signs... the first being "fire exit left" the other being "fire exit down" (which some people use to mean fire exit "straight on")

Both the BS and Euro Style feature the three elements (Ok the BS version features the running person effectively inside the white rectangle, the Euro style does not)

So what confusion has arised out of these two versions of the sign?
And why mention the fire exit left and fire exit down / straight on sign? - I still dont follow the significance of that

Is it the fact that people dont know what the ice cream block represents in the Euro style signage?

[Tom Sutton]

The adoption of ISO 7010 as an EN and the removal of the annex to EC 82/58 will require implementation.

I agree Jim and this will mean the legislators will have to revise our legislation to comply with the European directive. IMO, as it stands at this moment, the so called Euro-sign is in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations however I agree it is not as effective as the British Standard sign. But will a RP be prepared to change all his Euro signs to the British standard signs when the Euro signs are in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations, very much doubt it. I also doubt an FRS would be willing to take an RP to court for displaying a legal sign.

A secondary question is has EN 7010 and the revised directive been implemented yet?

[Jim Creak]

The graphical symbol for escape route as specified in BS 5499 and ISO 7010 is a single graphical symbol...person moving through opening...when tested against 3000+ other variants had the highest comprehension credentials. When this graphical symbol is supplemented by an arrow the arrow provides effective egress direction.....very simple very effective.....tested and proven.

Euro symbols white rectangles the meaning of which is not intuitive and open for conjecture, moving person meaning intuitive but when associated with a  arrow that is pointing to a cofusing graphical element that is also subject to confusion....next according to the annex if you need to give directional information it prescribes another arrow of different design which if you follow the annex information could point in the opposite direction to the small arrow incorporated into the sign. This is crazy...what the sign industry has done is understand that it is and has decide to create thier own products to fill the gaps....Euro signs that are derivatives of those illustrated. This cannot be satisfactory....it is like someone not liking the sound of morse code so he adds a few more dashes. Just as crazy.

Just look around at the mess....I was in an uk airport last week and the airport estates have adopted ISO 7010 International Standard and the concession retailers the Euro design.....not joined up thinking at all.

The legislators have indicated that there is no reason to change the legislation as they have indicated that they intend to withdraw the annex (the pictures) and refer to ISO 7010 for compliance for all workplace safety signs. This process is in line to be completed this year.

I concede that it is not necessary to change signs, in some cases I am recommending thier removal completely as with the retail environments within the airport and the same over the front door of retail outlets in shopping centres as a function of risk assessment......illumination yes signs not needed.

All I advocate as a consequence of the impending changes it is wise to consider the process of audit and review, not of one sign but the whole system of signs throughout the means of escape. Consider the provenance of BS 5499 Part 4 and ISO 7010. After all implementation is a matter for the profession not enforcers. Prevention of confusion is required not prosecution after the event.

[Tom Sutton]

Jim you have said this many times before and I fully agree with you, my argument is the Euro-sign is in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations, which allow variation SCHEDULE 1 Part II (1), and therefore legal. Consequently I repeat, will a RP be prepared to change all his Euro signs to the British standard signs when the Euro signs are in accordance with the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations, very much doubt it. I also doubt an FRS would be willing to take an RP to court for displaying a legal sign.

I suspect we will be living with Euro-sign for some time to come depending if the revised directive forces the legislators to revise the Health and Safety(Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations.