Jump to content
Security Installer Community

Bs5839 1988


Recommended Posts

Could anyone tell me where I can find a copy of the 1988 version of bs5839. It would be handy background reading in quoteing non conformances to the current regs if I knew more of the specifics of when they were in regs.

I know about suck things as non fire cable being used, fire cable for alarm cts, amendments for fire cable to call points etc. But I went to 3 properties yesterday all owned by the same chap owned and fire systems put in at the same time 20+ years ago. I assume by the same guy as the systems layout is identical.

Did 1998 allow any weirdness as far as siting of detectors? About 75% of the detectors are about 2" from walls or corners or rooms. obviously a serious no no today but was that the way back in 1988???? I was 15 when that regs came out so bit before my time. Not encountered this before to this extent in a property so made me wonder whether the installer was a guy from the pub or it was acceptable at the time. I can't imagine it would have been acceptable but am I wrong?

I am going to recommend a rewire of the system in strongest terms as there are other issues as only one callpoint at front door, many detectors being 14+ years old, bell sounders only in stairwells so less than 65dB in rooms (very quiet in some)...... but it goes back to the argument of detailing non conformances, but was acceptable at time of installation etc

Thanks

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest Cerberus NI
Could anyone tell me where I can find a copy of the 1988 version of bs5839. It would be handy background reading in quoteing non conformances to the current regs if I knew more of the specifics of when they were in regs.

I know about suck things as non fire cable being used, fire cable for alarm cts, amendments for fire cable to call points etc. But I went to 3 properties yesterday all owned by the same chap owned and fire systems put in at the same time 20+ years ago. I assume by the same guy as the systems layout is identical.

Did 1998 allow any weirdness as far as siting of detectors? About 75% of the detectors are about 2" from walls or corners or rooms. obviously a serious no no today but was that the way back in 1988???? I was 15 when that regs came out so bit before my time. Not encountered this before to this extent in a property so made me wonder whether the installer was a guy from the pub or it was acceptable at the time. I can't imagine it would have been acceptable but am I wrong?

I am going to recommend a rewire of the system in strongest terms as there are other issues as only one callpoint at front door, many detectors being 14+ years old, bell sounders only in stairwells so less than 65dB in rooms (very quiet in some)...... but it goes back to the argument of detailing non conformances, but was acceptable at time of installation etc

Thanks

John

I've been doing fire for 17 years now and as far as detector locations go it was always 18" out (roughly 500mm).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been doing fire for 17 years now and as far as detector locations go it was always 18" out (roughly 500mm).

:yes:

Always at least one celing tile from the wall, remember in domestic installs the wiring normally goes via the landings and keeping the detector close to the entrance door of the room makes for easier/less wiring which would explain the locations.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life is like a box of chocolates, some bugger always gets the nice ones!

My Amateur Radio Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it makes no odds when it was installed,it has to be checked against the current standard which gives you a good reason not to waste money on buying 1988.

list all non compliances to 2002 c.o.p

1988's siting and spacing are excatly the same as 2002

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cerberus NI
Current regs are not retro spective, are they not :)

Correct but you have a duty to make the client/customer aware of the fact that their system falls short of current regulations as a competant service organization.

As GJM has said,save your money and effort in tracing old regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct but you have a duty to make the client/customer aware of the fact that their system falls short of current regulations as a competant service organization.

As GJM has said,save your money and effort in tracing old regulations.

I agree however I feel it would be handy to take a brief history lesson as I can happily list all the non compliances to current regs but do not know whether it complied to 1988 regs and hence may still pass inspection but have list of non conformities to current regs. Don't work on many 20 yr old systems but rather be educated than unsure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Cerberus NI
I agree however I feel it would be handy to take a brief history lesson as I can happily list all the non compliances to current regs but do not know whether it complied to 1988 regs and hence may still pass inspection but have list of non conformities to current regs. Don't work on many 20 yr old systems but rather be educated than unsure.

In fairness there arew loads of customers out there like this and you'd be probably be wasting your time going to the hassle of compiling a timeline of non-compliance.

However,if you think that it's valid to go down this route then whatever floats your boat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree however I feel it would be handy to take a brief history lesson as I can happily list all the non compliances to current regs but do not know whether it complied to 1988 regs and hence may still pass inspection but have list of non conformities to current regs. Don't work on many 20 yr old systems but rather be educated than unsure.

John

you are giving yourself more work than required.It really does not matter if it complied years ago but what condition it is in now.

I was starting High School when 1988 was wtitten and i have a copy but i,m not going to read again.

All you can do is bring all non compliances to 2002 to your customers attention. The ball is then in their court.

If they give you the old line that "it complied when it was installed 20 years ago" then tell them that their electrics would have complied too but should have been rewired 5 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

you are giving yourself more work than required.It really does not matter if it complied years ago but what condition it is in now.

I was starting High School when 1988 was wtitten and i have a copy but i,m not going to read again.

All you can do is bring all non compliances to 2002 to your customers attention. The ball is then in their court.

If they give you the old line that "it complied when it was installed 20 years ago" then tell them that their electrics would have complied too but should have been rewired 5 years ago.

If I had tried that line on many of my customers I would not have been the one servicing their systems next time round.....

What's wrong with 15/20 year old electricial installations requiring them to be rewired? Sounds a bit daft to me? :hmm:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life is like a box of chocolates, some bugger always gets the nice ones!

My Amateur Radio Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not that I want to fill my head with the things of yesterday. Occasionally you come across someone who thinks they know a bit and it is nice to be able to say sorry mate that was in the 1988 code not 2002. You occasionally get these customers and I would prefer to sound knowledgeable than sound stubborn. Sometimes a bit of explanation of the reasoning for the change will make them realise they should upgrade.

Everyone here who worked to the regs before 2002 automatically know a 1988 system when they see it and know the changes to expect, type fault monitoring on panel etc. Which I think is sometimes easier than working it all out as you go along. I am not talking parrot fashion regs here just handy back ground on the odd key topic.

an example is todays work.

faults finding on an L2 system that had T&E on detector and sounder cts. I know they don't comply but I don't know when the regs said. So Guys,

Pop quiz time. can anyone tell me at what date the use if T&E was stopped for detector cts on full L2 system. Was it the 1980 /1988 / 2002 version of the code and was there any exception on dates for red T&E.

Actually same goes for T&E for bell circuits also (although I think that was 1980).

This job was out of my geographical area. My local authority has insisted on fire cable since the flintstones so I have never needed to know the answer.

Tomorrow I can jovially say come on on mate this has not complied for 20 years, about time you did something. Which will go down better chastising him for not changing it before. That was I'll probably get the install work and chase him up for annual servicing.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not totally true.... the only part of the regs that is retrospective is the maintenance section... as Graeme has said... all systems should be serviced to the new standard and variations/non-compliances recorded.....

Now i thought that was wrong, but im not arguing.

But my point was, if T&E was used, as allowed in previous regs, then the current regs dont force you to ripped out the T&E and replace it with fire rated cable, ect :)

I really can't be ar**** with it anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now i thought that was wrong, but im not arguing.

But my point was, if T&E was used, as allowed in previous regs, then the current regs dont force you to ripped out the T&E and replace it with fire rated cable, ect :)

Well if it wasn't retro you would have to accurately date the install of every installation and service against not only the appropriate BS year, but you would also have to know what amendments applied at the time as well..... it would be impossible!!

Absolutely true Adi... you can't be forced to change the wiring... this was the saving grace of the old Fire Certificate... but if you tell your customer he is now personally responsible for the complete fire safety and risk assessment of his building, would he still be prepared to sign the RA and keep his twin and earth knowing he may have to justify that decision in court if the worst happens and his 20 year old wiring could be to blame??

Would you sign your name to that assessment??? !!!

..... big decision !! :unsure:

Personally I would recommend to my client that their old system was obsolete and the wiring out of date and to replace the lot with something that met current standards.... :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if it wasn't retro you would have to accurately date the install of every installation and service against not only the appropriate BS year, but you would also have to know what amendments applied at the time as well..... it would be impossible!!

Absolutely true Adi... you can't be forced to change the wiring... this was the saving grace of the old Fire Certificate... but if you tell your customer he is now personally responsible for the complete fire safety and risk assessment of his building, would he still be prepared to sign the RA and keep his twin and earth knowing he may have to justify that decision in court if the worst happens and his 20 year old wiring could be to blame??

Would you sign your name to that assessment??? !!!

..... big decision !! :unsure:

Personally I would recommend to my client that their old system was obsolete and the wiring out of date and to replace the lot with something that met current standards.... :ninja:

20 year old T&E installed correctly will be good for decades to come! :hmm:

PVC which is not exposed to mechanical or UV damage should outlive us all!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life is like a box of chocolates, some bugger always gets the nice ones!

My Amateur Radio Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 year old T&E installed correctly will be good for decades to come! :hmm:

PVC which is not exposed to mechanical or UV damage should outlive us all!

Don't shoot the messenger.... just explain to the judge why you know better than Mr Todd and the rest of the BSI Committee who have recommended better cables...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't shoot the messenger.... just explain to the judge why you know better than Mr Todd and the rest of the BSI Committee who have recommended better cables...........

Don't misunderstand me, I didn't say PVC-PVC was the best, just that it can't be condemmed because it is 10/20 years old.

Of course there are better cables, there always will be, why don't we tell all customers to replace Firetuff with MI because it's better!!!!! If PVC-PVC was good enough to meet the regs when installed there is no reason to change it unless the system is upgraded to analogue or the building is renovated or extended. If there was a fire and a death I honostly don't believe a correctly maintained system wired in PVC-PVC to relevent standards would be somehow shown to have contributed to a fire or death. Properly maintained and installed there would be no comeback on the person responsible for signing the RA IMO. Even if there had been a small fire/fault that damaged the detection circuit that stopped a fire being detected how could culpibility be placed on the person signing the RA of a system correctly installed to relevent standards? Show me the case where this has happened and I will accept your point.

Now if you stated on a service form the cables were damaged or showing signs of damage or incorrect installation and there was a fire that was contributed to this there would be poo hitting the fan!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life is like a box of chocolates, some bugger always gets the nice ones!

My Amateur Radio Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a question. What would you do if when visiting a new customer you find a installation in PVC/PVC on detector cts.Then find out that the system was only put in 4 years ago by previous owner. Obviously a DIY job.

In theory you can't upgrade it as it wasn't done to a previous standard. etc etc. would you try to salvage the good bits, say it is ****, or leg it.

This happened to me last year on a 3 story L2. Then found out only 1 call pt by front door. detectors badly positioned, etc etc.

Fortunately I had plenty of work on and made a swift decision quickly say it was **** then legged it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say it was non compliant to the Standard that applied (pt 1 - 2002 presumably) at the time of installation and that if there is a commissioning document saying otherwise then its **** and the installation company should be reported to trading standards and sued.

The customer may choose to keep it if he signs the risk assessment.... its his risk.....!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

........Even if there had been a small fire/fault that damaged the detection circuit that stopped a fire being detected how could culpibility be placed on the person signing the RA of a system correctly installed to relevent standards?

Because if fire proof cabling had been used throughout the likelihood is that the fire would have been detected prior to the cables burning through and presenting a potential problem in another part of the building.......

Show me the case where this has happened and I will accept your point.

Now if you stated on a service form the cables were damaged or showing signs of damage or incorrect installation and there was a fire that was contributed to this there would be poo hitting the fan!

Most of the answers will only be arrived at by a judge and test cases.

Problem is that you can't generally visually inspect all cabling .... and when was the last time anyone carried out an insulation test on a complete fire alarm system as part of any kind of regular inspection.??

From the point of view of an average engineer covering their backside you would have to recommend installing cabling and equipment to current standards.

Otherwise why are we not still installing pvc cables ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the answers will only be arrived at by a judge and test cases.

Problem is that you can't generally visually inspect all cabling .... and when was the last time anyone carried out an insulation test on a complete fire alarm system as part of any kind of regular inspection.??

From the point of view of an average engineer covering their backside you would have to recommend installing cabling and equipment to current standards.

Otherwise why are we not still installing pvc cables ?

Well a FP200 cable would burn through before an MI cable so if your reasoning is followed through you would advise all your customers to have MI to replace all the FP200 because it's better? The standards change to include better design all the time otherwise we would still use manual bells for fire alarms and shout fire!

Examining all cables is never done as you know, but again the same would apply to a job done in FP200, are you going to tell all your customers to rewire 15 year old sites done in FP200 to cover your butt?

All test/service forms should include a clause that stipulates cables cannot be visually checked if they are in the fabric of the building, that applies to jobs a year old as well as the twenty year old installs but as I said you shouldn't be condeming a job for 15 year old cables on a whim, there has to be a good reason for it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life is like a box of chocolates, some bugger always gets the nice ones!

My Amateur Radio Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well a FP200 cable would burn through before an MI cable so if your reasoning is followed through you would advise all your customers to have MI to replace all the FP200 because it's better? The standards change to include better design all the time otherwise we would still use manual bells for fire alarms and shout fire!

Not really, the Standard only calls for cables to last for 30 mins or 2 hours. So if you're using enhanced FP you more than meet minimum requirements, so there is no need for MI less you are looking for increased mechanical protection.

So no need to advise customers to upgrade on that account, only the fact that if they are using PVC cables they are vulnerable to fire damage, that may create more serious issues in another areas of the building.

The old BS stated that it was ok to use pvc if it were routed through areas of low risk and providing a fire in a single location could not take out more than one detection cable.

Show me an installation where cables are not bunched together and run through loft spaces or risers that are not of low risk.....

If you do an inspection and you can't visually verify the cable routes then you can't certify the cables are even installed to an early BS therefore as said earlier... much safer for an engineer to recommend using a recognised fire proof cable and leave the decision to the Responsible Person as defined by the RRFSO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.