BS 9991

[jokar]

Had a quick read of this new draft document today.  I think I am going mad! What is an LD1 Fire Alarm system to BS 5839 Part 6, shouldn't there be a Grade in there somewhere.

The terms and definitions do not support the terms and definitions used in the prose, what is an area of special fire hazard, I know I will look in the Glossary of ADB for that answer.

and on and on.

[colin todd]

You can have LD1 as a specification of coverage without any reference to Grade, which relates to the format of the engineering.

[jokar]

Thanks for that but I don't see that in the context of the document.  I have read some more though, PHE for Sheltered Accommodation, references to BS 9999 but nothing about the Tables, but has carried across bits from the sections on Atria and Acccess and Facilities for firefighters but not all of it. The document seems to be really prescriptive and likes sprinklers a lot. 

[colin todd]

I was going to take it to California with me to read on holiday. Do you think it will spoil my holiday as in, from the producers of the garbage BS 9999, FSH/14 proudly presents the nightmare on BS 9991 street, now showing at a fleapit near you.

[CivvyFSO]

Well, lets hope that the whole 'draft' stage gets the errors and problems removed. It is not a million miles away from standard ADB solutions, and as Wiz says, plenty of allowances for sprinkler systems.

It is not the behemoth that BS9999 was/is, and I don't think it is being rushed through so hastily.

I don't think that there is an easy way to print the entire document out, its a web-based page-by-page thing, so you might have to go without it on your holiday. Don't be too sad.

[kurnal]

Do we know who has written the draft or which BSI steering group is reviewing it?

Can any of us get on the steering group to have some influence?

How does it sit with Colins new guidance?

Sorry to say I cannot adapt to the new on screen only review system,  it does not work for me. I used to download and read drafts on paper over a few days in my own spare time as bedtime reading etc and if I have to to do it online it will not happen.

People like the administrators at the BSI need to realise that for many of us at the sharp end  reading new guidance and standards has to happen outside working hours and is motivated through personal interest and a passion for the subject.  Even though more recently we had to pay to download the draft which was also a nonsense considering the value we were adding to the document.

I was on the PAS79 steering group and it was sad to note that the public consultation only drew responses from about 10 people. Was this because people could not download and print the draft?

[CivvyFSO]

I have to agree Kurnal. I am working my way through it, and it would be considerably better if I could print it out, highlight any issues, then go back and comment once I have finished. The online page-by-page thing tends to mean that I will comment on something, and then a few pages later the issue is actually clarified.

It doesn't seem very clear on the residential/domestic sprinkler issue. i.e. Which do you need to get the trade-offs. For most trade-offs or scenarios I would suggest that the residential standard should apply, but for such as inner-room bedrooms then the domestic system could be suitable. The standard doesn't make any apparent differentiation.

[AnthonyB]

It's very contradictory - first it says common areas do not normally need fire alarms systems, but then says that where a smoke control system is installed that requires AFD, then a BS5839-1 fire alarm system is required, which will be jumped on by all and sundry as a reason to fill every flat block with sounders and call points.

At least it will keep the fire alarm industry ticking over in installs, servicing and of course call outs an drepair of vandalised components!

[colin todd]

I seem to have a hard copy, so dont have all these excuses.  I wish I did.

Big Al,  I just told you if you would listen, it is ulitmately the responsibility of FSH/14 and the relevant technical sub-committee. There will be representation from all the usual suspects. The reason few people commented on PAS 79 is it is amazingly good.  Although my recollection may be wrong, I think even Eli wrote in to say something to that effect.

[kurnal]

Thanks Colin sometimes you are a little bit too cryptic for me remember I only had an English education.

Well heres the answer then http://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/Home/Committee/50002213#tabs-representation

Its very thin in terms of representation of the fire safety industry. No FIA, IFSM, IFPO, Warrington (must include everybody) or even CFOA. I might ask the BSI for a hard copy. Wont hold my breath though.

[colin todd]

Why would a certification body be involved in a standard for fire precautions in the design of dwellings? And if Warrington, which seems for some odd reason to be at the forefront of your mind, why not TRADA, BRE Certification and BSI laboratories.  I can only assume that, with your heritage, you have been drinking the vodka that comes from the town.  Big Al, sometimes I think that, when you drive home from London to Derbyshire you dont just stray off the M1 onto B roads but you divert over fields and woods. However, if you really need a hard copy, I can probably arrange this for you, after which I will teach you how to use the remote control on your TV, cook in a microwave (in case you give Mrs K a night off) and do all the things that we modern youngesters do.  However, I will probably stop short of teaching you to read a document on screen, as this would be a challenge too far.

[kurnal]

I just put that comment in devilment thinking it might wind you up (and it did).  Yes I probably spend too much time in the car with too little to think about.

Now you miss the point over the IT review system. Its not just a luddite view.

Civvy put one of the big problems in context in reply 6 above. Just as Civvys point is very relevant in reading the document, the system may  lead to poor and ill considered responses being submitted before a later clause in the document under review provides further explantion or context.

This may lead to unneccesary comment being made or later comments by the same persons retracting their earlier comments. I find it particularly irritating on screen where the document under review refers to other clauses and sub clauses,  in which statements of the  " 6.1 if any of the items considered in clause 2.5 are found then they shold be considered and recorded on the proforma in appendix A" because you cannot easily cross reference these.

I have noticed the horse chestnuts are turning autumnal three weeks early this year.

[colin todd]

Well I am off to Los Angeles in the morning and will take my hard copy of BS 9991 with me. You were unsuccessful in winding me up, Big Al as I am demob happy and I take comfort in the fact that Lech Walenza went to school in Glasgow.

[jokar]

That is why he was such a strong man then!

I have worked my way through my hard copy only to become confused, not too hard for me.   Lots of comments to make but probably the main one is that it is confusing.  You read one clause in one section and then it states something else in another.  Wouldn't it be nice, is that a line from a song from the 60's. to have clarity throughout one section and all the information relevant to a particular build type there in front of you rather than having to dig around numbers of pages.  My particular favourite at the moment is that with sprinklers in dwelling you can double the travel distances in blocks of flats but not in sheltered housing or care homes.  The aged and the disbaled obviously only live in sheltered housing and care homes is a logical conclusion then.

[kurnal]

I agree Jokar but then that also raises another thorny question that is not addressed by the document.
11.1.2 Permitted variations of guidance

With the exception of sheltered and extra care housing, where a block of flats is fitted with a
sprinkler system in every flat, the maximum travel distance for escape in one direction only
may be increased from 7.5 m to 15 m and for escape in more than one direction it may be
increased from 30 m to 60 m.

This is in a building in which each flat - and NOT  the communal areas- has its own self contained BS9251 domestic sprinkler installation. How on earth can the maintenance of all these installations in private dwellings be enforced,  controlled and co-ordinated? How many will still be working in 10 or 50 years time? We have enough problems with flat entrance doors and even letter plates for goodness sake.