BS5839 Part 8 2013

[hammer1]

Afternoon chaps is there much deviation from the 2008 document? especially in regards to maintenance and testing? with xmas coming up don't have the ?100 odd squid to buy especially if there is little difference.

Many thanks in advance.

[Golden]

http://www.fia.uk.com/download.cfm?docid=58383A79-5404-49F6-862028BBA25D56F0

Those nice chaps at the FIA have done all the work for you and I'll gladly endorse their work but I wouldn't like this to be seen as a promotion.

[colin todd]

I thought you didnt like the FIA, Silver.  PLUS (and you know I am not one to criticize) you have given him a link to the changes to BS 5839-1 when he asked for the changes to BS 5839-8.  Probably best that sickle just asks Father Xmas for a copy of the 2013 version. Alternatively, I offer excellent training on the differences.

[Golden]

Oops my bad - sorry Hammer and I've copied the changes below - it appears that apart from the testing recommendations the rest are quite technical. As well as offering training Mr Todd also has contributed to a nice book about the code which can be used as a handy reference document.

The new BS "introduces a number of technical changes" and not a re-write and here is the summary of changes:

• New recommendations on placement of speakers
• new recommendations on audibility
• the text on cables and wiring has been updated, as has the text on radio linked systems to avoid conflict with new BS/EN
• new recommendations on testing relating to over familiarity of occupiers if messages are repeated weekly
• the term responsible person has been removed and replaced with 'premises management'

I never said I didn't like the FIA colon - I just believe they would be more professional if they paid more attention (ahem!) to what was written in press releases and didn't just regurgitate a flawed message plus if they kept their less professional members in check on public forums when they're trying to flog fire detection in PB flats without any appreciation of the risk of this approach but just out to make a few quid. Phil Martin has got involved a few times but there are some keen members that appear hell bent on pressing forward the detection and alarm in PB flats when they clearly have no idea of the issues involved - a professional organisation should exercise some control.

[hammer1]

Oops my bad - sorry Hammer and I've copied the changes below - it appears that apart from the testing recommendations the rest are quite technical. As well as offering training Mr Todd also has contributed to a nice book about the code which can be used as a handy reference document.

The new BS "introduces a number of technical changes" and not a re-write and here is the summary of changes:

• New recommendations on placement of speakers
• new recommendations on audibility
• the text on cables and wiring has been updated, as has the text on radio linked systems to avoid conflict with new BS/EN
• new recommendations on testing relating to over familiarity of occupiers if messages are repeated weekly
• the term responsible person has been removed and replaced with 'premises management'

I never said I didn't like the FIA colon - I just believe they would be more professional if they paid more attention (ahem!) to what was written in press releases and didn't just regurgitate a flawed message plus if they kept their less professional members in check on public forums when they're trying to flog fire detection in PB flats without any appreciation of the risk of this approach but just out to make a few quid. Phil Martin has got involved a few times but there are some keen members that appear hell bent on pressing forward the detection and alarm in PB flats when they clearly have no idea of the issues involved - a professional organisation should exercise some control.

Many thanks Golden for taking the time to respond, I was mainly looking at the testing/maintenance aspect to be honest.

[Golden]

Hammer the BS advises weekly tests by operating a manual call point and with minimum numbers of staff and public exposed to the message with monthly tests where they have exposure to the emergency messages during testing - no less frequently than quarterly. Actual test intervals can be based upon an appropriate risk assessment. The test message may be used to allow people to report areas of low audibility.

[colin todd]

 a professional organisation should exercise some control.

Does that mean that CFOA is not a professional organisation, given that it exercises no control over the trash turned out by many an FRS in ENs, witness statements and prosecutions.