In the May edition of the Fire Risk Management magazine it was reported that a looter received an 11 year jail term for starting a fire which destroyed a furniture shop in South London during the riots of last summer.

Mr Thompson set fire to a sofa cushion and the ‘blaze that developed was so fierce that the buildings on the opposite side of the road were engulfed, threatening the lives of residents, and tram lines in the road were damaged’.

Under Building Regulations approval for any building, the allowable amount of unprotected area on the façade of a proposed building is calculated to prevent fire spread to adjacent building from radiation from a fire within the proposed building. The building, used as the House of Reeves furniture store in Croydon, therefore should not have had enough unprotected area on its elevations to spread fire beyond it determined boundary, or in this case the relevant boundary of the centre of the road.

Something went fundamentally wrong for the fire within the House of Reeves furniture store to engulf buildings on the opposite side of the road, regardless of whether the fire was started deliberately or accidently. We feel that the investigation after the fire should have looked not only at the initial cause of the fire but also identified the fundamental failure which caused the fire to spread to buildings on the opposite side of the road.

Many clients choose not to get a fire engineer involved at the early stages of a project, at the concept and planning stage to keep costs down, but is it false economy? We understand that from a client’s perspective they want to spend the minimum amount of money on a project at this stage in case the project does not progress beyond planning. However, the involvement of a fire engineer at this stage can provide design flexibility, cost savings and prevent expensive fire issues at the later stages of the project.

As the design of a project is very fluid and changeable at concept and planning stage, this is often the best time to get us involved. Providing the architect with design flexibility in the early stages can be very beneficial. Innovation Fire can offer design flexibility by providing fire solutions to facilitate a safe bespoke design that best meets the brief of the client. Our early involvement prevents the design from being constrained and also helps the client to avoid potential fire issues at the next stage of the project, which could impact on the design.

Our innovative fire engineering approach at the early stage of the project can also identify significant cost saving. This can include, reducing the number of staircases to provide more saleable or leasable space. We can also, reduce the amount of fire resistant walls and fire doors or even removal of the requirement for a sprinkler system. These identified savings can assist in tipping the balance of a project from a non-financially viable project to a viable one and may also enable the client to be successful with their tender.

Innovation Fire provides the confidence and reassurance to the design team that there will be no problems with the fire design at the Building Regulations stage and the scheme will not need to go back into planning as any fire issues will have been solved. We provide an excellent service, including fire advice, resolving fire issues and marking up fire compartments and fire doors throughout the concept and planning stage. Innovation Fire can bring significant value to a project, as well as meeting the individual requirements of our clients at a competitive price. Therefore your client only needs to spend a little to save a lot!

To benefit from a no obligation, free appraisal of your project at the concept and planning stage, contact us on 0113 237 3028 or email us with your plans today. We will demonstrate the value we can bring to your project.

If you are checking out a new project, bidding against others for the appointment, you want to make sure that you have covered all the aspects but how do you do this within a very limited budget?

The Innovation Fire Feasibility study could be just what you need to check out the fire safety aspects of the proposed building for minimal cost. The service helps bring value to identify potential cost savings and provide solutions to fire safety issues whilst retaining design flexibility.

For small projects we can carry out a desk top study, mark up the fire resistance, highlight any fire safety issues and offer solutions to rectify any issues.

If your scheme is more complex or you have several options that you are considering, we can attend a design team meeting to discuss the implications of the proposed options, including any potential cost savings (e.g. the removal of a staircase) to assist you in the design process. Following the meeting we will mark up the plans for the options chosen to be pursued including solutions to any fire safety issues.

The service offers you design flexibility, peace of mind, cost savings and fire safety solutions at very low cost. Prices range from £300 to £900 depending on the complexity of the scheme and whether a meeting would be beneficial.

We recently carried out a feasibility study on a proposed hotel. The available footprint was limited by the surrounding buildings and roadways. Our brief was to design out the second staircase to give more floor space for bedrooms.

During the design team meeting it became clear that the client wanted to have several options presented to them – a restaurant at ground floor level, a restaurant at top floor level and an option with one floor sublet for office space. Issues also arose with the multi-storey car park to the rear of the proposed hotel which would require mechanical ventilation having previously been naturally vented.

Innovation fire provided advice during the meeting, marked up three options for fire resistance, fire doors and corridor ventilation. We gave solutions for the single stair option and options for mechanical venting of the car park.

The client was assured that whichever option they chose, there would be no fire safety surprises as the project progressed.

If design flexibility, cost savings and peace of mind are what you need at the very early stage of a project, then contact Innovation Fire and ask for a Feasibility Study quote.

A letter in the November issue of the Fire Risk Management magazine highlighted the misconception that all occupants of a care home need to be evacuated to outside the building if the fire alarm is activated. This would be potentially dangerous for the occupants of the care home if they were evacuated to outside on a cold wet night and also difficult to manage with the night time staffing levels and the varying degrees of mobility of the occupants.

Most care homes are therefore designed for progressive horizontal evacuation with higher levels of fire resisting partitions to create places of relative safety within the building so that a small number of residents need to be moved along the same floor to the next compartment. The fire resistance between compartments is designed to offer adequate protection from fire and smoke, however a route is always available from this compartment either horizontally or vertically to another compartment if further evacuation becomes necessary.

It is usual to have the fire alarm sounding throughout the premises to alert the staff that they need to go to the fire alarm panel to check the location of the potential fire.

It is also acceptable in an unsprinklered care home to have up to 10 bedrooms in a compartment which equates to up to 20 people to move to a separate compartment in the event of fire.

Innovation Fire advocates an alternative evacuation strategy which offers a greater degree of safety and less disruption and anxiety to the residents of the home.

All care homes have some kind of nurse call system which can include staff pagers. If the fire alarm is configured to sound only in the room of fire origin where the fire alarm has been activated and all staff are alerted via a pager system that there is a fire, the only people aware of the problem are those within the room of fire origin and the staff. This significantly reduces the disruption and anxiety of the residents who are outside of the room containing the fire. It also means that member of staff can focus on only evacuating the fire room, hence the evacuation time is a lot shorter. If the activation is found to be a false alarm then very few residents have been disturbed.

Some care homes are designed for people living with dementia, the sound of a fire alarm can be very upsetting and actually make it more difficult to assist them to a place of safety if the fire is in their compartment. As any evacuation would be staff led the pager alert system would negate the need for the fire alarm to sound. An audible alert at the fire alarm panel and repeater panel could be used in conjunction with the pager system.

Modern fire alarm systems are fully addressable and therefore easily able to provide a less disruptive intelligent alarm system for care homes – isn’t it time that the fire alarm design for care homes kept pace with the architectural design to provide care homes which are desirable places to live in rather than institutional establishments.

Prior to 2007 the prescriptive guidance for fire safety in schools could be found in Approved Document B (AD B).

So what are the differences between BB 100 and AD B? The main difference is that sprinklers are recommended for all new schools except for very small, very low fire risk buildings or small extensions to existing unsprinklered school buildings. There is also a change in the recommended maximum compartment size, the need for compartment floors and the rooms that are classed as being of high fire risk. The main recommendations for each document are summarised in the table below.

All new buildings must meet the fire safety requirements of the Building Regulations, these are for life safety only.

It can be seen from the table above that there is scope to meet the requirements of the Building Regulations for life safety and provide property protection using a fire engineered approach.

Given that a compartment size of 2000m² in an unsprinklered school prior to 2007 was considered to provide an acceptable level of life safety, it is clear that the reduction in compartment size seen in BB 100 is for property protection, not for life safety.

Prior to 2007 it was recommended that a life safety sprinkler system was installed if the compartment size increased to between 2000 and 4000m². The doubling of the compartment size was considered to affect the life safety of the occupants and therefore a life safety sprinkler system was recommended as compensation for the significantly larger compartment size.

A property protection and a life safety sprinkler system act in exactly the same way to control the fire size: a sprinkler system is made up of fixed range pipes above ceiling level with sprinkler heads at ceiling level. The sprinkler head has a liquid filled thin glass bulb which is temperature sensitive and sits between the end of the pipe containing the water and the deflector plate. The heads closest to the fire will heat up and when they reach a set temperature (usually 68°C in this type of occupancy) the bulb breaks and water flows through the head, spreads out over the deflector plate and onto the fire and surrounding area. Only the heads which reach the activation temperature will break. The purpose of the sprinkler system is to control the size of the fire and limit the amount of damage to the building and its contents. Sprinklers can sometimes extinguish fires but they are not specifically designed to do so.

The life safety sprinkler system is provided with duplicate items such as valve sets and water supplies so that the system can be maintained without taking it out of operation and to increase the reliability of the sprinkler system operating when required.

A property protection sprinkler system with a compartment size of up to 2000m² therefore provides the same level of life safety in a new school today as that of a new school in 2006, with the added benefit of property protection.

A sprinkler system is very costly to provide however for a building type which is very prone to arson this makes financial sense. The provision of a life safety system is far more costly than that of a property protection system and yet it is property protection, rather than life safety, which is of issue.

At a time of financial hardship and government cuts is it right for the government guidance document to recommend the most expensive type of sprinkler system to protect new schools where there is no life risk? Should the guidance be rewritten to advocate property protection sprinklers or water mist systems as property protection measures rather than life safety sprinkler systems?

After the month off: travelling, climbing, camping and chilling, it was definitely time to start work. It’s been a year since I was last here at Innovation Fire’s office in Leeds for my summer placement in August 2010 and it feels very good to be back for another month. There have
been a lot of changes over the past year including moving offices and the addition of another fire engineer but already after only a week it feels like I never really left.

I got immediately stuck in to work; after a quiet few days at the start I’m now already feeling like part of the company again, commenting on website design, working on smoke control, responses to the fire service on a shopping mall and on an evacuation policy for a care home.  Already within in a week I’ve had a chance to look at so many different projects and tasks.

I’m looking forward to the next three weeks, and already can’t believe that I’m a quarter through this placement! It’s really going to
fly. I’ll be back in uni for my masters in no time at all!

However, less well known and published is the specific risk posed by timber frame construction in completed buildings. There are two main issues specific to timber frame buildings, the quality of construction with regard to fire stopping, and fire fighting issues. Compartmentation, an essential safety feature in a completed timber frame building, is present only if the fire stopping has been provided according to the design. In typical brick and mortar type buildings, if fire stopping is not 100% correct and a fire occurs which spreads into a void, the brick is inherently non combustible so the potential for fire spread through the void and a large fire developing is less likely. However in timber frame buildings, if a fire occurs and a weakness in the fire stopping is present, fire can spread into a void. The void then contains timber which is inherently combustible and therefore fire can potentially spread within the void to other areas of the building, causing a large fire. In essence, if the fire stopping is not installed correctly then timber frame buildings are more susceptible to minor ignition events becoming large fires than in typical brick and mortar type buildings.

The second issue with timber frame construction is the fire service not being able to identify the type of construction when they arrive to fight a fire. Timber frame buildings can be virtually impossible to identify from a visual inspection of a building. The various different types of cladding on the outside of a building mask the fact that the building has a timber frame. In some cases a brick facade is used and it is impossible for the fire service to know whether a building is timber framed. If the fire service had the knowledge that the building was timber framed, their approach to fighting the fire would be modified. They would also consider the best way to prevent the specific risk of potential fire spread within the voids of the building.

What needs to happen next? Some people, especially within the insurance industry are wanting a blanket use of sprinklers with timber frame buildings. In our opinion, installing a suppression system is a generic solution but is not the only solution to providing a safe timber framed building. At Innovation Fire, we prefer to develop a solution that addresses the specific risks within the individual building we are working on. This ensures fire safety is not compromised but the package of fire safety measures is not over specified, hence are clients are not lumbered with unnecessary costs.

As timber frame is here to stay, the long term strategy should include the following: -

Controlling the quality of construction in timber frame buildings during construction
Education of trade persons on the subtle differences of fire stopping requirements on timber frame buildings
Development of a clear and simple system for the fire service to identify timber frame construction, to assist fire fighting operations

This education element of the solution will take time, but in our opinion this will be a more effective as a long term solution than the government changing Approved Document B to incorporate sprinklers in all timber frame buildings. There is currently no political will to amend Approved Document B, the cost to developers of using sprinklers may be prohibitive in this economic climate and the use of sprinklers is not the most cost effective solution to address the fire safety issues in this type of building. What do you think?

As someone with a Civil Engineering background, I had to quickly absorb the basics of fire engineering and code compliance. I was aided tremendously throughout this steep learning curve, so much so that I started feeling quite cocky about my recently acquired fire engineering knowledge by the end of the placement. Having said this, the more work I did the more I realised the enormous scope of fire engineering topics.

Most of my time was dedicated to preparing and writing fire strategy reports. This process involved; comparing against code compliance, problem solving and above all free thinking. There is more than one way to skin a cat, and fire engineering certainly proves this idiom. How refreshing it was to actually use one’s mind and imagination in the workplace!

During my placement, there was plenty of goings on. I attended a CPD presentation, a networking event and a site visit. Additionally, we came up with some marketing strategies to publicise Innovation Fire’s services and ethos. These were great opportunities to get out of the office and learn a more comprehensive view of the company.

The environment at Innovation Fire has been a pleasure to work in. I was encouraged to express my views, and any contributions I made were treated with respect and appreciation. At no point was there any element of micro-management, yet support and instruction were always on hand when I needed it.

Peter Turnbull

The recommendations in Approved Document B (Fire Safety) take the size of the building, the occupant type and the use of the building into account to provide guidance on the level of fire resistance, the size of compartments, the size and number of staircases, the maximum distance to be travelled before a place of safety is reached, the number and size of doors and the facilities and access for the fire service to name but a few.

A new building designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Building Regulations for Fire Safety should therefore be a safe building in the event of fire.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order (RRO for short) replaced about 70 pieces of fire legislation and is concerned with the life of the building from the time of occupation. The purpose of the RRO is to define the responsibilities of the occupiers of the building to provide general fire precautions, keep a check on the activities within the building, remove, reduce or control fire risks, train staff in fire procedures and maintain and test fire safety equipment.

A building can be perfectly safe until people are introduced into it and the RRO is the piece of legislation which aims to outline how to manage the activities and people within a building to ensure that in the event of fire, everyone remains safe.

When you are designing a building you have to comply with the requirements of the Building Regulations for Fire Safety but do you also have to consider the RRO? The Building Regulations already consider the occupant type – sleeping or awake, familiar or unfamiliar with the building. They take into account the type of building – residential, industrial, office, assembly and recreation – and therefore the type of activities which will be taking place there. The height of the top floor and the extent of the footprint of the building are also taken into account, the guidance suggesting greater levels of fire resistance for a greater number of floors or a building which operates a phased evacuation policy.

The RRO looks at what actually happens in the building when it is occupied so, from this viewpoint, we can improve our designs by asking sometimes basic questions to make sure that the building includes features that will assist in the safe running of that building. In a student accommodation building with a single stair – where will the post be put – pigeon holes at the base of the stair would be convenient but not ideal in a sterile staircase therefore make provision for post to be stored in the common room which is fire separated from the staircase. In schools and bars call points can be misused therefore consider hinged covers, alarmed covers, CCTV or the sighting of call points in staff areas at the design stage to limit false alarms when the building is occupied.

In conclusion, the Building Regulations are there to ensure that fire safety is considered in the design of buildings and the occupants, type of activity and size of the building are all taken into account at the design stage. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order is concerned with how the building is actually used and managed. There is a cross over between the two and therefore it is essential for good communication at the design stage so a holistic view can be taken and some aspects of the future use of the building can be addressed.

It is possible to design buildings in many different ways therefore other approaches can be used but the requirements for Fire Safety outlined in sections B1 to B5 of Schedule 1 to the Building Regulations must be met.

A comparative design approach can be taken – this entails comparing the level of safety achieved in the proposed design with that of the code compliant equivalent. If the level of safety in the proposed design is at least as good as the code compliant alternative, the proposed design will also have met the requirements of the Building Regulations for Fire Safety.

This is where fire engineering is of benefit – fire engineering uses a time based approach – all fires start small and grow, the speed of growth and the eventual size of the fire are affected by the amount, distribution and type of combustible items in the space, the amount of oxygen present, the size of the space, whether the walls offer any fire resistance and whether there is any form of fire suppression present. Balanced against this we have the time which it will take to get all the occupants of the building to a place of safety before conditions within the building become too difficult to escape.

The escape time is made up of different time steps – time from ignition to detection, time from detection to alarm, time between hearing an alarm and deciding that there is a need to leave the area (pre-movement) and the time taken to travel to a place of safety away from danger. All these time steps can be shortened by the introduction of different things – the time from ignition to alarm can be reduced by having an automatic fire detection and alarm system; the pre-movement time can be significantly reduced with good staff training including regular fire drills; the travel distance can be reduced by making the distances shorter from a place of danger to a place of safety.

Approved Document B restricts travel distance because this is an easily measurable parameter however travel distance makes up a very small part of the overall escape time. At an average walk speed of 1.2m/s it takes only 7.5 seconds to travel a further 9m however providing an automatic fire detection and alarm system can reduce the time from ignition to alarm by minutes. A lack of staff training and frequent false alarms can lead to people not leaving the building when a real fire occurs however regular staff training, maintenance of the fire alarm and reduction of false alarms leads to prompt evacuation of a building.

Fire engineering uses a combination of factors to take a holistic view of the building taking into account all the passive and active measures provided to deliver a building which is safe in the event of fire but allows greater freedom to designers to achieve their goals.

What design freedoms would you like to achieve – get in touch with Innovation Fire Engineering and we’ll help you to make them a reality in the most cost effective way.