New school sprinkler system

[TFEM]

Brand new school, sprinklers installed.
Lets call him Phil the Fire Officer. "Ooooh sprinklers! No need for fire extinguishers then!"
Site manager Simon says.....don't like that idea!
How far do we compromise?
Is there any document that says if sprinklers are installed, fire extinguishers can be reduced by such and such a %?
Is it down to the FRA and what the assessor says?
Most schools have a policy of not using fire extinguishers but should they be there anyway?
Should Simon seek his insurers view?
Questions, questions!!!
All advice appreciated.
John

[nearlythere]

I don't consider a sprinkler system to be first aid fire fighting equipment. It is for second aid fire fighting. Sprinklers would require fire development to actuate when a simple and relatively cheap portable extinguisher could be used to deal with a small outbreak so preventing water damage and the resultant disruption. Most fires in schools happen when unoccupied and in that respect it makes sense to provide sprinkler protection. But a sprinkler system, to me, is for a different purpose than extinguishers.

[kurnal]

I agree with NT, extinguishers are there to deal with small fires in their incipient stages and sprinklers are no substitute for this. However I do take account of sprinklers in larger buildings when calculating the A rating requirement for fire extinguishers, and often reduce the provision, typically by 50% compared to the BS5306 formula. I do still ensure that the travel distance recommendations of BS5306 are still met. This approach has been accepted by fire services and insurance companies wherever I have adopted it.

[AnthonyB]

And don't forget areas where water is not a suitable extinguishing medium or where clothing fires could occur (labs, kitchens, etc)

[Mike Buckley]

Yes, I have had a similar arguement with a building which is being converted into a hotel.

The sprinkler system will take a considerable amount of heat to activate it and may well cause greater water damage than the fire it extinguished, hence the need for fire extingishers. Another aspect is one of the proclaimed purposes of portable fire fighting equipment is to enable people to secure their means of escape by tackling a fire that may be on their route.

If you have a look at the video from Devon on the fire starting from a light diffuser, I feel it is unlikley that the fire would actually hae generated enough heat to set off a sprinkler sytem.

[Phoenix]

I agree generally with everything that has been said here but I cannot agree with this.

Another aspect is one of the proclaimed purposes of portable fire fighting equipment is to enable people to secure their means of escape by tackling a fire that may be on their route.

Extinguishers should be sited by the exits.

Looking at the original post, I'm really pleased to see that a new school is being fitted with sprinklers.  I've dealt with quite a few in the last year or two and, despite the facts that a) the toolkit spreadsheet indicates that sprinklers should be fitted in many cases, b) that the fire service strongly recommend fitting them, c) that schools regularly burn down with devastating losses and d) that compartment sizes in BB100 are often flouted, the designers seldom put them in. 

"Do we have to put them in?"

"Well, you're not legally compelled to."

"Then we shan't."


And what about this:

Most schools have a policy of not using fire extinguishers but should they be there anyway?

Is this true?  Do these schools that have a policy not to use extinguishers actually have extinguishers on site?  If so, what are they there for?  Decoration?

Stu

[Mike Buckley]

Stu,

As I understand it there is a bit of corkscrew thinking going on. If the reason is given that they are there to fight fires then people are being encouraged to get involved in fire fighting and putting themselves in danger. However if they are provided to help people escape then people are not being encouraged to fight the fire but extinguishers are there to be used if necessary.

With reference to the FSO it doesn't say that you need to provide fi extinguishers but you are required to provide fire fighting equipment and the easiest way of doing that is fire extinguishers. However you can risk assess them out if you can show that they could be subject to vandalism etc.

[Midland Retty]

Stu,

 However if they are provided to help people escape then people are not being encouraged to fight the fire but extinguishers are there to be used if necessary.

Extinguishers are provided for trained members of staff to tackle a small fire if they wish do so, again there is nothing that states they should fight fire. Extinguisher are not provided to secure the means of escape. If you need fire extinguishers to protect your means of escape the building must be unsafe. Sprinklers on the other hand can be used to secure the means of escape issues in some circumstances.

With reference to the FSO it doesn't say that you need to provide fi extinguishers but you are required to provide fire fighting equipment and the easiest way of doing that is fire extinguishers.

True, as others have said however this may not please the insurance companies. I for one however would much prefer staff to ensure they and their pupils have safely evacuated rather than tackle any fire, but thats just me, and it is for the school to decide if extinguishers are required or not. Question is if you removed all your extinguishers, and put in a sprinkler system would you land up in court? I'd have to say probably not.

[supersafetyservices]

Both Sprinkler and Fire Extinguisher is important for all the sectors. We can't distinguish sprinkler and extinguisher, as both are useful while risk and uncertainties of fire.