Blog

Today (Monday 15th February 2010) Notifier launched the ground breaking digital protocol of automatic detection called OPAL

Notifier's new OPAL digital detection range

The product is a revolution for the Notifier brand and is in fact two protocols in one, the traditional CLIP protocol and the new digital OPAL protocol.

What does this mean for the users?

The new range can be used on the existing Notifier systems as CLIP protocol and in the newer panels can fulfil the potential that the OPAL range has to offer including;

The new protocol will provide up to 318 devices per loop (On the new panel range), increasing the loop loading capacity, built in loop isolators and advanced fault finding capabilities designed to speed up troublesome wiring issues during the ever pressured commissioning stage of the new installation.

The use of intelligent systems in the UK has seen some changes throughout the history of automatic fire detection and alarm systems and now WFP are pleased to be able to offer this new and powerful digital protocol to our customers.

Please call our office and ask how the new digital system can provide a fire detection and alarm solution for you.  0845 481 0307.

Since the RRO (Regulatory Reform Order) Fire Safety 2005 came in to force there has be a very slow rise in prosecutions, although I have noticed that recently the Brigade have really started to exercise their powers.

Having spoken to a few fire officers when they were first starting to police the act, it was clear that they were feeling their way in their new roles,  its worth pointing out that the date on the order was not the date that it actually came in to force as with all things of this nature there was a period of grace.

I have subscriptions to the fire industry blogs and news portals and I have noticed that more often there are are stories about various businesses being fined under the above act.

Today I have read about a Pub chain that was fined £15,000 for the lack of a fire risk assessment, I copied the details and the story is below;

Pub company fined £15,000 in fire safety prosecution
12 February 2010

A pub management company has been convicted of offences under fire safety law following a hearing at North Wiltshire Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday.

Publicana Ltd was fined £15,000 for the offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and was ordered to pay the prosecution’s costs.

The offences came to light after Wiltshire Fire & Rescue Service attended an incident at the Little George pub in New Road, Chippenham on 5 October 2008.

After an investigation by officers, charges were brought against Publicana Ltd as the tenants at that time. The company was charged with failing to carry out or record a fire risk assessment, failure to have effective policies for protection and prevention measures, and the failure to provide suitable and sufficient information to the pub’s sub-contracted licensee.

The prosecution is pursuing separate charges against an individual in connection with the case.

“It is rare for a fire and rescue service to undertake prosecutions but, on this occasion, the offences were so severe we felt it was in the public interest to pursue charges,” said group manager Julian Parsons of Wiltshire Fire & Rescue Service’s technical fire safety department. “What this case has shown very clearly is that management companies always have a duty to ensure that public safety is not compromised, even if they have sub-contracted someone to act as licensee.”

He added: “Since these offences came to light, the Little George pub has changed management and subsequent inspections have shown that the issues highlighted by this case have been addressed. In addition, Publicana Ltd, which was cooperative throughout the investigation, has introduced stringent new management procedures to ensure that something like this does not happen again in premises it is responsible for.”

For more information about this subject or any others on the site please call or email us.

Paul

I saw this article in the online magazine ‘The Journal’ it was written by Elisabeth Griesedieck
Wednesday 25 November 2009, The Journal Issue 28.

Save these for when you really need them

Regular false fire alarms could lead to fatalities

Records show out of 512 fire call outs in 2008, only 4 were for fires

Once I had read the article I felt moved to post a reply in order to explain that in my view false alarms were caused by the lack of planning and design know how and that even if they had occured they should and could be managed out of the system.

The original article

Less than one percent of all fire call outs to student accommodation at the University of Edinburgh were for “real fires” last year according to statistics released by the university.

Records kept by the University’s Fire Safety Unit show that Lothian Fire and Rescue Services respond to over 300 false fire alarms at the University of Edinburgh per year.

“The recurring fire safety issues associated with students tend to be false alarms, kitchen fires and fires caused by smoking materials,” says Geoff Aird, community safety manager for the local fire brigade.

“And there is always the odd student who thinks it’s fun to set off the alarm in their halls,” Mr Aird added.

When mechanical faults, malicious alarms, and actual fires are included in the count the total calls that the fire brigade responds to at the university average out to 500 per year.

In 2008, only 4 of 512 calls to the brigade constituted real fires. Figures for the final quarter of 2009 will be released in December, however the total calls since January until the end of September is already around 400.

Michael Moore, the university’s fire safety advisor, attributes the high numbers to lax attentiveness on the part of students.

The university undertakes initiatives to raise awareness, which include offering educational programs at the start of each academic year, training for residence hall staff, and distributing posters around campus.

At present Lothian Fire and Rescue service do not charge the university for excessive false alarms, yet it reserves the right to exercise this power.

Fire brigades in England and Wales have already introduced fines for excessive alarms applicable to corporations and individuals with negligent habits or faulty systems.

The fines range from small charges of £120-£250 for individuals to larger penalties in the thousands of pounds for non-compliant corporations.

UK Fire Training, Information, and Consulting lists on its website the hazards of a system with a “reputation of generating false alarms”.

False alarms “undermine occupants trust in and response to alarms” and “place occupants at risk because they may not respond to a real alarm for a real fire.”

These dangers have been felt on university campuses before.

In 2000, a New York university, Seton Hall, witnessed one of the worst dorm fires of the twentieth century when a couch was set ablaze. Students failed to evacuate the building, as the fire followed on a month of false alarms. 3 died and 60 were critically injured, including several firemen.

Natalie MacKay, a student in university accommodation at Kincaid Court, worries that such an event could reoccur here: “There have been times when I haven’t evacuated the block; especially if it’s the fourth alarm that week. I just assume it’s not real.”

Mr Moore’s message is directed toward such responses. He says, “We all must treat these systems with care. Not doing so could cost someone their life.”

The First reply (Not mine)

Madeleine Ranges
Sat 28 Nov 2009
“Michael Moore, the university’s fire safety advisor, attributes the high numbers to lax attentiveness on the part of students.”

What a load. I live in the S. Clerk St. dorms and the fire alarm goes off at least once a week. We received a warning in the mail recently about how we were responsible for one of the false alarms and if we were to do it again we would be responsible for a fee of a couple hundred pounds…as if we set it off on purpose? I know I just LOVE waking my fellow students up at 7:30 in the morning with a false fire alarm. The problem lies in the over-sensitivity of the alarms and very rarely the students.
Also, as far as this is concerned:
“The university undertakes initiatives to raise awareness, which include offering educational programs at the start of each academic year, training for residence hall staff, and distributing posters around campus.”

We were told to be careful around the fire alarms but definitely not warned that the alarms go off due to aerosol deodorant (??) And why not nip the problem in the bud by doing something about the alarms rather than fining the students?

And another thing! My flatmate had a small cooking fire the other night (he just left the pan on the stove with some oil in it a second too long–he was in the kitchen the whole time, just had his back turned..) anyway he managed to put it out but the fire alarm failed to go off in THAT instance.. so what good are these things if all they’re doing is crying wolf?

Thanks for writing this article. These fire alarms are ridiculous!

And my reply

Paul Field

Wed 16 Dec 2009
I have been in the fire industry for over 20 years and in my experience this issue reoccurs in most student accommodation blocks, however if the system had been designed correctly in the first place virtually all of the false alarms can be managed out.
There are fire systems on the market that intelligently manage alarm conditions by comparing the heat and smoke within a room to confirm that there really is a fire, however these detectors cost about 50% more than the basic types which is one reason that they are not widely used, the other reason is ignorance on the part of the designer to the existence or application of these or even the standard types.

Its not always the fire alarm systems fault, contributing factors can be poor ventilation from cooking areas or the wrong choice of detector type by the designer. (making the system appear to be sensitive)

With some concerted effort on the part of the facilities maintenance team in conjunction with a decent fire alarm company the above situation can be changed. There are simple things that could be done immediately such as moving detectors away from the potential source of false alarms, local hush buttons can be installed, or even delays on single activations and if justified, changing smoke detection to heat detection.

If students are setting their own system off there is not much that can be done about that other than education or the installation of CCTV followed by fines etc.
I can understand the frustration in Madeleines comments, but for example if they had changed the detector to heat due to false alarms from dust or other contaminants in her flat then it would not respond to smoke from the cooking.
Of course every system has to be evaluated on its own merits but in my experience there are always solutions to these problems.

If you contact your Local BAFE registered company they should be able to help (BAFE is a third party approval scheme which is a bit like the Gas Safe Register (used to be CORGI)) www.bafe.org.uk or take a look on our website www.w-fp.co.uk

Paul Field

How long is a piece of string?

How long is a piece of string?

A common question to which the answer is dependent upon other factors.

A smoke detector is the same as any other product in the real world, it deteriorates over time and the speed of this is dependent upon two fairly obvious factors;

1. The environment that it is installed within  - In dirty environments it will not last as  long as a clean room

2. Has it been maintained? - Your car requires maintenance to keep it working efficiently and accurately, so does your fire alarm system.

To comply with BS5839 Part 1 2002 +A2, Section 6 point 45.3 subsection (n)  which requires the manufacturers guidance to be followed, the devices should be replaced in accordance with the manufacturers guidance.  I have added an extract below which covers this point.

The Signs

If you start to experience false alarms on your system or the number of calls to site to investigate faults with the devices increase then you may want to ask the question of your maintenance company.

Most, if not all, manufacturers label their devices on the inside or underside of the detectors, for example Apollo Fire Detectors have a series of labels on their products and have produced a guide for reading the date information.

If you have started to experience false alarms this could be due to the age of devices or through contamination of the detector internally, if you allow this to continue, in a very short time this will reduce the effectiveness of the system to evacuate the building as unwanted alarms cause a general mistrust in the systems integrity.

“That blinking fire alarm has gone off again” followed by inaction, which has the same effect as not having a fire detection and alarm system in the first place.

If the age is not found to be the issue then you may need to have the device chamber cleaned, which may require dis-assembly or could be as simple as being blown through with compressed air.  If this is a consideration then please make sure that you consult the services of a qualified and experienced engineer and also note that some devices can not be taken apart and can only be cleaned and re-calibrated by the manufacturer.  When you look at the economics of this you might as well just replace the product that is causing the issue.

The Manufacturers advice

Series 65 Optical Detector

Apollo Fire Detectors (for example) advice is that the product operating life is 10 years based on the operating life of the component manufacturer and that they should be replaced after this time.

The ID range of  Notifier (by Honeywell) products offers a solid and reliable product to the end user, the specifier can be assured that the product will perform and for installers a user friendly addressing system that can be explained over the phone or during the pre-installation visit by the WFP surveyor.

ID 3000 Multiloop networked panel

Key advantages of Notifier (by Honeywell)

1. Long Term - Its tried and tested and is based on a platform of backwards compatibility, in short its here for the long term

2. Easy set up -  It is a solid analogue system using a simple dial address setting

3. Reliable - Backwards compatibility is a key strength of the Notifier product and recently we have upgraded Notifier systems that were installed over fifteen or twenty years ago.

The older range of Notifier systems include;

ID 200, ID 1000, AFP panels

4. The Brand - Solid and good quality

The current ID range consists of the ID50, ID60, ID2000 and the superb ID3000.

The ID50 is the entry level single loop addressable control panel running the SDX-751 optical smoke detector, for greater cause and effect programming the ID60 is available in the single loop market. If you need greater device loading then the multi-loop ID2000 can cost effectively run up to eight loops and for the larger and more complex multiloop sites the ID3000 is available.

There is a Notifier (by honeywell) solution for you,  call us to discuss your exact requirements on

0845 481 0307 or 0800 988 3312

Having been involved in the fire industry for over 20 years now, it has become obvious to me that the level of investment in training is patchy and sometimes a bit hit and miss. From a customers point of view the professional contractor should be well trained as a significant level of trust has been placed in the competency of the company and its engineers.

Hit and Miss Training?

What I mean by the opening statement is that the most obvious training is normally achieved, which is organised by the FIA (Fire Industry Association) or the BSIA (British Security Industry Association), this normally covers the basics of the standards required to comprehend the job at hand but what it does not cover is the key technical differences that can help the engineer solve and resolve a problem accurately and quickly.

The benefits of training are obvious to most who consider these issues, it takes some evaluation of the people involved then some significant time based concerted effort to fill the gaps found.

For the customer the benefits should be;

• better advice
• quicker resolution of problems
• confidence and trust building

Most fire and security companies rely upon site based experiences, however the issue that we see with that is you will inevitably end up with gaps in the knowledge.

Our answer to this is to foster a new learning for life environment within our business and to this end we have created a dedicated training resource centre to facilitate our efforts to keep our people ahead of the game.

WFP Training resource centre

Our new training centre is on the same estate as our office and has been kitted out with a rack of control equipment, which is interchangable depending upon the product that is being learnt, the engineers can create simulated scenarios on the training panels and systems to gain an understanding of linking panels together in a school environment, the cause an effects of a system covering a larger building using the device simulation software.

We also use it to train our engineers on the finer points of PC usage, linking to the WFP server intranet by VPN connection, where we host a significant technical resource database from frequently asked questions to technical drawings of the various site scenarios that we have encountered through the years.

Customer training

For our installing customers we intend to offer product awareness course and installation techniques designed to improve the installation capability of the eletrician adding value to WFP customer proposition, should you require more information about these then please contact us directly in the office 0845 481 0307.

If the customer does not install and is looking for either product awareness or installation training we would be happy to discuss this individually and add this to our offering.

We already do site CPD style seminars for consultants and building services engineers, please speak to Greg Reeves our sales manager for more details about these.

In Summary (to answer my own question)

Yes I think that anecdotal evidence and experience shows that the consistency with training across the industry is patchy and has been a bit hit or miss, one thing that I am certain of is that once an engineer has gone through the training courses most companies don’t actually debrief the engineer and find out if it was any good or if the engineer actually learnt anything!

Paul

Building Site on Fire

Statistically you are unlikely to be caught in a fire in your office, the people are awake (unless they are reading this post) and alert, other people in the building are generally aware of the fire safety requirements of the office environment. This new standard has been brought out by the British Standard’s Institute and replaces the BS5588 series of standards, parts of which had already been superseded by the BS5839 Part 8 (Voice Alarm Systems)

For the fire industry BS9999 provides a useful guidance to the process of fire risk assessments from various stages of the buildings existence, from new to refurbished.

(more…)

If you are fed up with the way your systems are linked together and you are reading this post, then help is at hand!

Site managers will appreciate the time saved in running between buildings

Linking relays

You have a fire alarm system in each building on the site and in some cases they have multiple systems in one building and in order to meet the requirements of the risk assessment they (the various panels) are linked together.

The downside to the above is that if they (the panels) are not linked properly you will find that you (the site manager and his/her team) have to go to each panel individually in order to reset, and this process is often hit and miss and takes at least two people.   The issue with this is that most working sites such as a primary school  will not accept the fire alarm ringing other than for the drills or in the event of the real fire, and whilst the system is being reset it is particularly concerning for the site managers who will be recieving pressure from the staff to stop the fire alarm promptly.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

All fire panels can be interlinked in some manner, this is in some cases the problem,  precisely because a lot of the systems on the market have multiple ways of being linked more often than not the inexperienced installer will choose or wrongly configure the links and inform you that it is the only way that this will work. They are wrong!

Sounds simple enough doesn’t it?  Well although it is fairly simple, if the in built options (on the panels) do not work in the way that you require, we have to use relays, this takes an in-depth knowledge of relays and the uses of the various types that are available, such as latching or non-latching, timed or pulsed etc.  Our engineers are trained in the operation of relays and we believe that this is essential to work on any alarm system.

The other options

I can’t pretend that using the linking methods that I have touched on above will always give you the perfect solution to your needs, the installed panel in your site may not have the non-latching options that many non-addressable panels now have, you may have to look at upgrading the control panel to get the system to operate in the way you prefer.

Addressable Fire Panels

Addressable Fire Alarm Panel

If you have an addressable system then linking the systems should be even easier than non-addressable, you will need to install interfaces to make full use of the capabilities that exist, or if you need more detailed functionality then networking is the option that allows you to see all fire events from all of the buildings on your site at one central control panel or computer graphics system.

Definitions

1. Addressable Panel (system)

This type of system is generally wired in a loop or loops and the each detector is ‘addressed’ these allow the control panel to identify each device individually giving a read out on the control panel such as “SD 012 GRD FLR RECEPTION”

2. Non Addressable Panel (system) more commonly known as ‘conventional’

These panels are basic in operation and are wired in radial circuits (one wire from the panel to all of the smoke detectors without returning to the control panel) This system can only indicate zones such as Ground Floor, meaning that if you have this type of system you may ahve to search the entire ground floor for the detector that has gone off. You would have a zone chart beneath the panel listing zones;

ZONE 1 - GROUND FLOOR

ZONE 2- BOILER ROOM

ETC

WFP specialist engineer David Munday has debuted as an author, when David joined the business in 2008 he was well underway with a project of his own. He has now seen his book published, been on the radio to promote it and has created his own website backing up the central character of the book. 

Having read the book to my own daughter I can thoroughly recommend that it as a children’s story with a super hero that you’d never expect! A truly original story and one that I found certainly drives your imagination. 

I have a signed copy at home - Thank you David, and It now has a new cover with a portrait of Joshua. 

If you want to read more then visit http://www.joshuabean.co.uk/ and buy yourself a copy online. 

I have put an except of the book below

“The formula has become a part of the plastic in the dummy. So you see if you use it again,” George concluded “your body will just grow as before and for a time you will be an adult. Then you will go back to your normal self. The longer you suck the dummy, I would expect, the more time you will spend in adult form. But to be safe, until we can get you to the lab I wouldn’t advise you try it.”

This Order came into force on 1 October 2006. It replaced over a hundred pieces of fire safety legislation including the Fire Precautions Act and the Workplace (Fire Safety) Regulations. Fire Certificates are no longer issued or enforced. It placed a duty on the ‘responsible person’ to ensure, ‘as far as is reasonably practical’ the safety of his/her employees and to take such general fire precautions as may be reasonably required to ensure that the premises are safe [ie for non-employees].

Under the Order, there is a requirement to carry out and continually update an assessment of the risk of fire to people in and around the premises/building, and to assess and maintain the measures to reduce those risks to an acceptable level. Where there are five or more employees, the risk assessment must be recorded.

A Fire Risk Assessment should be carried out:
1. On completion of the building fit out and preferably before first occupation of the building;
2. Regularly, particularly where any changes occur such as changes in the use of the building, the number or nature of occupants, or building works;
3. We would recommend that a fire risk assessment is carried out at least annually.

Other legal duties include:
1. A person must be nominated for any special role identified in an emergency plan;
2. Employees must be consulted about nominations to perform special roles, and about any proposals for improving the fire precautions;
3. Other employers in the building must be informed about any significant risks, which might affect the safety of their employees, and there must be co-operation with them in measures to reduce the risk;
4. Those having control over the workplace have a responsibility to ensure compliance with the regulations in those parts of the building over which they have control;
5. A suitable and readily available method of calling the emergency services must be established;
6. Employees are required to co-operate in ensuring that the workplace is safe from fire.

The order also adopts ‘Principles of Prevention’. These include:
• Avoiding risks;
• Evaluating the risks which cannot be avoided;
• Combating the risks at source;
• Adapting to technical progress;
• Replacing the dangerous by the non-dangerous or less dangerous [particularly with respect to hazardous substances];
• Developing a coherent overall prevention policy which covers technology, organisation of work and the influence of factors relating to the working environment;
• Giving appropriate instructions to employees.