Type of Fire Alarm System

[Tadees]

Small bakery on the ground floor 100m² occupied by tenant 1.

First floor used as educational premises for small children and is occupied by tenant 2.  First floor juts out at the rear so is slightly bigger than the ground floor.  The first floor has independent means of escape. 

Risk assessment covers bakery only i.e. tenant 1.  In such a scenario, isn't asking tenant 1 to put in a part 1 system too onerous?  Would a part 6 system be adequate or is the system for in-between scenarios such as these whereby two systems could be cobbled together?

[kurnal]

Tadees I woulld suggest it depends entirely on the compartmentation between the two very different purpose groups. And if the fire separation between the two is not all it should be perhaps detection and alarm may not be a suitable compensation? (especially as smoke detectors are unllikely to be installed in a bakers) .

[Tadees]

Kurnal - Compartmentation is ok. Obviously it would have to be heat detection but question is what system

[nearlythere]

What do you mean by "what system" Tadees?
Catagory?

[Tadees]

Apologies, I meant category

[kurnal]

If compartmentation is in place to the required standard perhaps there is no need for alarms to be linked?

If you wish to provide detection and alarm linked in both premises as an additional safeguard over and above benchmark standards then it is quite in order for you to specify whatever type and category of installation will meet the percieved risk

[Tom Sutton]

I have a supplementary question and I fully accept I have no practical experience of requiring fire alarm systems. However is it acceptable to ask for a part 6 system in anything other than a domestic premises. Maybe the lowest category of a part 1 system but never the less a part 1 system?

[kurnal]

Tom I would look at it this way. As you say, part 6 systems are designed for domestic situations. Generally they are not suitable for a workplace where a fire alarm system is required except for some very limited scenarios for example an inner room in a small office where otherwise a manual alarm system would be provided.

However if you already have a good belt and a pair of braces holding your trousers up that you can rely on and you just desire the additional support and safeguard of a bit of string fore some reason then you will probably be fairly relaxed about the quality of the string.

[Tom Sutton]

I agree Kurnal in the dim and distant past I also have required self contained fire alarm/sounder for inner room situations and we even produced a local NW guide for the workplace regs which suggested it for corner shop situations. However the above question posed, I would imagine it would be a full fire alarm system and would be a grade A,B or C. If that was the case both part 6 or part 1 systems require indicating equipment, detectors and sounders so would it be too onerous as they would be similar in cost? I think.

Would some kind fire alarm engineer come to my rescue.

[AnthonyB]

Remember that depending on the grade of Part 6 system you loose features such as fault monitoring, long duration standby power, fire protected cable, manual activation etc.

When you start comparing a Grade A system to it's part 1 equivalent you're not necessarily saving much.

Yes, the DCLG entry level guide does have a Part 6 single station detector in it's example, but this is for a clearly defined purpose (warning inner room occupant only) in a very small premises.

For price comparisons and really technical spiel, the gang on firealarmengineers.com will be glad to help (some of them frequent this forum from time to time as I do theirs!)

[William 29]

Does the system suggested Part 1 or Part 6 fulfil the function of raising the alarm in the event of a fire?

[AnthonyB]

......in a way that is suitable sufficient for the risks present and in all reasonably foreseeable circumstances.....


Otherwise we could still have nothing in small premises, rotary gongs in larger ones and 240V manual systems with unprotected call point wiring in big ones.

[CivvyFSO]

How about a grade C part 6 with a maintenance schedule similar to part 1? A risk assessment should really find that the maintenance should be as part 1, as I think that it would be reasonably practicable to implement this.

The grade C system could be used to ensure that a fault gives an alert of some description. The maintenance schedule should ensure that the system works.

I would also have no problem with a heat detector in the bakery, providing there was at least 30 minutes between the other premises and the bakery.

[kurnal]

......in a way that is suitable sufficient for the risks present and in all reasonably foreseeable circumstances.....

....... everything is reasonably forseeable when you have the benefit of hindsight........