Fire warning for deaf people using vibrating pager systems

[colin todd]

I think there is a need for a proper approval scheme for such equipment. Although BS 5839-1 ties down the basics, there is a lot more that could be specified in the engineering, plus all sorts of people claim compliance when they clearly do not. How much interest would there be from users for 3rd party certificated equipment?

[SeaBass]

Colin,

This is definitely an area that needs to be addressed, but it needs to cover much more than an approval system vibrating pagers. The evacuation of the less able is an area which I am becoming more and more concerned about, particularly as building owners and occupiers appear to concentrate on disabled access, with little or no thought of evacuation procedures for these people.

I was recently told (by a metropolitan fire brigade) that the brigade would not agree to fire fighting lifts being used for the evacuation of people with mobility restrictions, unless it could be guaranteed that all potential users would be out of the building by the time the first appliance arrived. This is in an eight-storey building for heavens sake. A bugger to get out of if your in a wheel chair or an asthmatic, but not to difficult for a fire fighter to climb.

But it gets worse. A company that I have been involved with were advised by the local building controls officer not to install a wheel chair ramp because the space available was 300mm short of that needed to achieve the required 1 in 12 incline. This is lunacy.  Vehicle access ramps don’t achieve this figure, and nor do most streets or paths out side of East Anglia. Surely a slightly steeper ramp is better than trying to bounce a wheel chair down steps?

If you’re going to peruse this Colin, then I’d urge you to draw up a comprehensive guidance document with common sense advice based on real life.  I’d be more than happy to assist.

[wee brian]

Just a thought.

How can a "Metropolitan Brigade" stop you using the lift. It may have been provided for their use but they don't own it.

They could probably come up with some cock and bull story using the workplace regs or the FP Act but I'd like to see them try it in court.

[MShaw]

For God's sake Ruby, name the Brigade and put us all out of our misery!!

[colin todd]

The problems of disabled evacuation are readily acknowledged (along with the sheer ignorance of people about his, including some fire officers). However, BS 5588-8 is already in existence and being revised. The point I raised related purely to vibrating pager systems for deaf people, for which there are now very general recommendations in BS 5839-1. The problem is that these recs do not go far enough in nailing down engineering design. Moreover, some companies claim compliance without even understanding the recs, and worse still some large national companies are stupid enough to believe these claims. Since it was my idea to include fire warning systems for deaf people in the revised BS 5839-1 in the first place, I find this a little disheartening. It would be possible to have a 3rd party certification scheme for the equipment, but the cost of testing the equipment to the recs (particularly the environmental tests of BS EN 54-2) would be high (possibly £25,000). No manufacturer is going to pay this unless users demand 3rd party certificated equipment. Hence the original question.

[Guest]

Interesting question, Colin.  It’s not my field, but if the kit currently being offered either claims compliance with the standard but doesn’t comply, or it complies with the standard but wouldn’t work for other reasons (e.g. poor quality control), then I would suggest that there is a strong case for Third Party Certification.  

TPC only usually takes off if there are large, influential users who are minded to add the requirement to their own specifications.  The key, therefore, is to identify the main potential users/purchasers of the kit.  If we’re expecting deaf people themselves to buy the kit, then TPC will not be an issue – choice will be cost-driven.  If, however, large users would be inclined to buy the kit (local authorities?  Universities?) then they may be persuaded to add TPC to their specs.  I know that the RNID sell equipment for deaf people - I wonder if they would consider endorsing a scheme of some description?

In any case, the effort required to ‘market’ TPC to potential users could be substantial.  The obvious beneficiaries of the certification are the certification bodies (LPC, Certifire, BM TRADA etc), who, provided that they are convinced there is a market, may be persuaded to devote the resources necessary both to put the scheme’s technical requirements together and to get the requirement into the specifications.  Over to you, LPC et al!

James Whittaker

[colin todd]

I was not referring to the domestic type equipment, but to systems for commercial premises, for which the uptake is growing exponentially. There are several commercially available systems, some of which are extremely good and very well thought out. Others are nothing like what is required.