1 January 2014 is the critical date after which any Visible Alarm Device (VAD) newly installed and used as the primary means of warning as part of a fire alarm system must, under the Construction Product Regulation (CPR), conform to EN54-23.
Much has already been published on this topic, and its introduction has posed a significant challenge to alarm device manufacturers. The challenge has been accepted by the industry, which has responded with the development of new designs, usually employing innovative electrical and optic technology, which can be certified as meeting the requirements of the standard.
The key driver behind the introduction of the new requirements is the Equalities Act. The product standard is designed to ensure that, as far as is practical, the fire system will generate an effective warning for all occupants of a building, particularly people with hearing difficulties, in the event of a fire.
Traditionally, the primary fire alarm warning mechanism has been the audible sounder. Recently, it has become usual for the sounders to be supported by visible alarms, which have only ever been intended to be secondary reinforcements for the audible alarms. However, driven by the disability legislation, if light is used as a primary warning, it must now be effective in alerting the deaf or hard of hearing to the emergency.
Similarly, in high ambient noise environments where workers are wearing ear defenders, the same need can arise. In addition, today’s consumer technology and people’s lifestyles mean that many people regularly use in-ear speakers to listen to music, so they may not hear an external sounder.
EN54-23 gives an independent assessment of beacons’ performance in the same way that EN53-3 does for sounders. With this standard, systems designers, risk assessors, installers, etc., can assess what the requirement of a beacon must be in order to deal with a particular application and then have confidence in choosing the right device for the job. For example, compliant beacons and sounder beacons are designed for areas where people with hearing difficulties may be alone, environments with high levels of ambient noise, and areas with restricted access.
The committee that developed EN54-23 is to be applauded for its approach, which, as it well knew, would require a fundamental change in visible alarm technology to ensure that the light output from warning beacons was sufficiently bright to attract attention.
The solution was to develop three categories: W (wall); C (ceiling); and O (open). The key performance indicators are that the output of the device must be greater than one candela (cd) and less than 500 cd; the flash rate must be between 0.5 and 2.0Hz.
The critical requirement from a manufacturer’s point of view is that each model must be tested to demonstrate compliance with the standard’s requirements. For ceiling-mounted devices, the manufacturer must define the maximum height at which it can be installed, set by the standard 3, 6, or 9 metres. A wall-mounted device must be installed at a minimum of 2.4m from the floor in the same way a sounder is today. The coverage volume, defined by the manufacturer, is that in which the output meets the minimum illumination requirement of 0.4 lumens/m2 (lux) on a perpendicular surface.
To avoid having to install an unacceptably large number of beacons, manufacturers are typically designing to meet smoke detector spacings. The result is that W class devices are assessed in terms of the dimensions of the cube of light they cover and C devices are assessed as the diameter of a cylinder of light. The coverage of an O class device is a cuboid of light, defined by the manufacturer as independent of the EN54-23 height/placement requirements.
A further important consideration is that if the risk assessment does not specify a VAD for a particular area, it will still be acceptable to install a non-compliant beacon as a supplementary indicator to a sounder.
A huge investment in new product development has been made by all the major warning device suppliers, and, by the cut-off date, there will be a wide choice of compliant devices available. As would be expected, the designs and their features vary, so from the competitive point of view, the situation is unchanged.
As is currently the case, it will be the responsibility of the fire system designer, responding to the risk assessment for a specific building, to calculate the positioning and number of detectors, call points, and audible and visible alarm devices required to provide adequate coverage to protect the building’s occupants.
As might be expected when there is a major change to standards that affect such a complex matter as fire system design, there is considerable discussion in the industry about what changes will be required from the introduction date. Reputable suppliers and system houses have already conducted in-depth discussion sessions with risk assessors and specifiers and are offering design tools or setting up CPD-approved programmes to advise the industry of the implications of the changes.
The Equalities Act is the key driver for the new requirements, and it will be interesting to see how specifiers and risk assessors respond to the introduction of the new standard. For example, will compliant beacons as well as sounders have to be installed in all locations, or only those, such as hotel bedrooms or lavatories in commercial buildings, where the hard of hearing might be alone? In a public area, for example a hotel lobby, it could be argued that a deaf person, even if he cannot hear the sounders, will be alerted by the sight of other people moving rapidly to the exit. Specifiers will obviously have to include a clause in tender documents requiring that where VADs provide a primary warning, they must conform to EN54-23.
The preferred option to alert hearing impaired people that an emergency exists and an evacuation is about to occur are flashing beacons installed as part of the fire alarm system or perhaps a paging system. However, in rooms intended for sleeping, visual alarm devices may be considered to be ineffective in waking sleeping people, and a tactile device such as a vibrating pager could be used for people with hearing difficulties.
Recommendations on the planning, design, installation, commissioning, and maintenance of systems using visual alarm devices complying with BS EN 54-23 are given in the joint BRE/FIA Code of Practice, CoP 0001, which can be downloaded from Red Book Live.
The fire industry supports any initiative that improves the effectiveness of its life safety products. The introduction of the new product standard for VADs that defines the effective operating areas of the devices is a major step forward in meeting the requirements of The Equalities Act. Already the AV device manufacturers have risen to the challenge with the development of new products, and without doubt, the risk assessors and systems integrators will do the same.
It is very clear that from 1 January 2014, any VAD newly installed in a fire system and used as a primary warning device must, under the CPR, conform to EN54-23. Reputable VAD manufacturers have responded with new designs that have been third-party tested to EN54-23. System integrators will ensure that the VADs in their systems will have the necessary approvals.
At this early stage before the implementation date, there are a number of grey areas, primarily associated with interpretation and subsequent implementation. The potential uncertainty arises during the process in which the person responsible for the building commissions a risk assessment, which is then turned into a tender document against which the system is designed, installed, and commissioned. There will inevitably be a degree of interpretation in the risk assessment as to which areas of a building need to have both sounders and strobes; indeed, the need will vary according to the level of occupancy and use on a building-by-building basis. There can be no hard-and-fast rules; each assessment will be made on the specific circumstances.
The mandatory date for EN54-23 implementation is only a few short months away. Systems integrators need to have a clear understanding of the capabilities of the VADs from their chosen suppliers. To ensure that their fire system design criteria take into account the coverage area achievable by the device may initially appear to be complex; in fact, the VAD manufacturer has already done the work. Providing the VAD manufacturer is a company that manufactures reliable products and offers good technical support, meeting the new requirements in the field may be a surprisingly simple process.
Download the Fire Safety in 2023 eBook, keeping you up to date with the biggest news and prosecution stories from around the industry. Chapters include important updates such as the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and an overview of the new British Standard for the digital management of fire safety information.
Plus, we explore the growing risks of lithium-ion battery fires and hear from experts in disability evacuation and social housing.
This is a very informative and interesting article, but a similar bulletin covered the same subject only a few weeks ago, including coverage drawings.
True, but we wanted to make sure the message gets through before the deadline. Clearly, it’s working!
Personally we believed the message was through before the previous “deadline” and had the products and approvals in place already. A whitepaper can read here
Indeed the unit won the Red Dot Design Award in 2013 and has it unique place and information plus sizing tools on our website
With almost a years experience under our belts since the certificate was awarded we are mor than happy to be consulted on the subject!
regards
Mark
[email protected]
http://www.pfannenberg.com
Very useful insight from within the Industry. Thanks Mark
could not agree more wealth of the good usable info/ideas… thank you…
Hi Mark great article. I have been looking for an answer to the following, but without luck; I wondered if you would know? EN 54-23 paragraph 4.3.5 gives the maximum pulse flash time as 0.2sec, but what is the minimum?
Thanks