IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Assessing Property, Rather Than Life Protection.........
Rank: Super forum user
|
OK, there's thousands of pages on the interweb all about fire risk assessments to protect life safety. (Fire Safety Order and all that)
But is there any benchmark systems simply to assess building/property/asset protection? It is very likely that (as with fire alarm systems), more onerous control measures would be required, but is there an accepted methodology (such as BS) as there is for life safety FRAs?
I assume insurance companies, those with heritage buildings, high value stock and IT companies would have a system as part of their business continuity systems. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
(Yes I know this isn't strictly H&S, but any provision would of course add to the overall safety of the building)
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Messy
I would suggest that its down to reducing fire load/Heat release rate and ignition temperature due to radiant heat flux of materials/furnature/fittings and structural elements. Also taking into account maximizing the integrity of structural elements. In essence confine the fire to the room of origin for the maximum amount of time and in terms of property protection, the selection of efficient suppression system.
Also as you know, its a good idea to take into account building separation to prevent external fire spread.
If I were to use any particular standard, I would probably select BS 7974 part 2 but particularly Part 3: Structural response and fire spread beyond the enclosure of origin;
Regards
Bleve
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
flux to materials/furniture/fittings
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In essence maximise the critical heat flux and thermal response parameters of the materials of construction and fittings as much as possible in order to increase time to ignition.
(tig)^-1/2= (q'-CHF)/TRP
tig = ignition time seconds
q' = Heat flux (kW m^-2)
TRP = thermal response (kW s^0.5 m^-2)
CHF= Heat flux required to ignite material (kW m^-2)
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Take a look at RiscAuthority - https://www.riscauthority.co.uk
This is an insurer funded body, formerly known as InFiReS. Site contains a lot of research and best practice guidance on property / asset protection from fire and theft. A lot of the info is free once you have registered (also free).
The FPA is another useful source of info - Fire Protection Association.
For details of fire resisting materials (4 hours is the property protection ideal, not 30 mins), take a look at the LPC RedBook Live. LPC is the Loss Prevention Council.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Insurers have been doing risk assessments for very many years although they call them fire surveys. Simply put, a trained fire surveyor would visit a site, gather factual information on construction/separation, location, process, fuel, fire protection and human factors and report to the underwriter with an opinion on the level of risk, along with a set of insurers requirements for improvement. The underwriter then takes a view on whether to accept the risk, at what premium and how much to reinsure.
In recent years this process has become less common and the available skills have become diluted (retirements, no training, less competence) as underwiters have become more reliant on "smart" computers. There is however still a significant pool of fire survey/fire engineering experience and skill left within the insuranace industry.
Messy, PM me for more info if required.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
stuff4blokes wrote:
Messy, PM me for more info if required.
Or me - I do the job stuff just described for an insurer and have done so for around 24 yrs now.
From his terminology I suspect Stuff has done the job as well.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
First started in 1975 and probably could still find my way round the Cotton Mills Tariff!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
stuff4blokes wrote:First started in 1975 and probably could still find my way round the Cotton Mills Tariff!
Did you used to colour your plans? Ever work for Royal or SunAlliance / RSA?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Not too many cotton mills about these days though !!!
Nowt wrong with the ability to apply cfd either
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
stuff4blokes wrote:
In recent years this process has become less common and the available skills have become diluted (retirements, no training, less competence) as underwiters have become more reliant on "smart" computers. There is however still a significant pool of fire survey/fire engineering experience and skill left required.
Stuff, I see no dilution of skills and do not see a problem with the use of cfd or computers in relation to establishing a book of quantum wrt to fire risk.
I actually find your comment disingenuous. There are now more qualified and supported by cpd fire engineers than so called trained fire surveyors
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Am working on a problem for a client at the moment. Would be interested in seeing you and stevies solution as self proclaimed gurus versus my so called diluted skills approach. Let me know if you are up to the challenge
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Bleve, I'm certain stuff was refering to the dilution of expertise within the insurance industry. A lot of firms have laid off their surveyors or given them early retirement and now farm out the work to outside firms.
Insurance surveying is a discipline in its own right but the customer is the underwriter who simply wants to know what it will cost in £ note terms and is the client doing enough to prevent it.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Apologies, at the time, I took it as a dig at the Fire Engineering profession.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks for the info everyone. I am obliged for your advice and views.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Messyshaw,
Please dont forget the age of the building and structure ( height, size ( car factory many acres ) in your assessment. Together with the intended use, storage of materials( that will add fire loading ) process and companies occupying the building i.e single occupancy vis-a-vis multi occupancy. KPI'S of each will also have a refelection on the exposure to the property risk.
You will also appreciate that whilst life risk is the priority apsect in fire safety that property is a very close second and fire detection and suppression systems have been designed for both, in addition to portable Fire Fighting Equipment.
Regards
Wizard
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
May be this thread should be renamed "How to teach an elderly relative how to suck eggs".
I don't think Messy needs pointers on how to carry out a FRA. He was looking for information concerning specific property protection standards.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
All info received will useful, but in fact what I was specifically after is where a company has a significant number of premises all contributing in different ways to the success and profits of the company, is there a process to determine where asset protection should be provided.
I suppose it would be a sort of business impact assessment (BIA), but with a bias towards fire. This particular firm are reasonably OK with life safety strategy and infrastructure, but have very little to protect their commercial assets/success.
The insurance company have been next to useless in advising, and seem happy to receive their enormous premiums without a fully BIA type survey.
I have compiled a list of considerations/questions to ask the client and was thinking about arranging them in a risk scoring grid. However before I present this to them, I was just asking in this (badly worded) post if anyone had gone through a similar process with a largish organisation or could point me towards an ACOP or similar benchmark
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I don’t think that a fire specific BIA would be of particular benefit. Business interruption may well take place due to a number of factors. Your client should be able to identify their high asset premises, processes, product, supplies of raw materials etc. If they have not carried out this exercise then this needs to be completed prior to any further action.
The next steps should be:
Prioritize each site in order of the Client ranking (Premises and process level). It may be the case that there is a single high asset process on an extensive site and obviously the entire site would not need to be assessed.
Carry out an assessment of fire risk versus the existing protection measures provided so as to identify those that are deficient, optimum and excessive/over engineered. Some over engineered measures involve ongoing and unnecessary expenditure while providing little value.
The assessment should be based on:
1. Frequency of ignition based on the nature of the premises and surface area.
2. Extent of fire spread and damage
3. Financial/production/continuity loss based on predicted area of damage.
Point (2) will be influenced by compartmentation/fire resistance, suppression systems, methods of fire detection/time to detection, response time to fire (on site response and fire service).
The above are not as onerous as they seem, it makes life easier if you utilize a spreadsheet program like excel.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Stevie40 - thanks. I was criticising the lack of skills within the insurance industry and I have great respect for competent fire engineers. Bleve, you are still quick to "blow up"!
Business continuity management is a discipline in its own right and there are several bodies around who have members who have expertise in that field. The larger global insurance brokers have this expertise.
Messyshaw, a business impact analysis will look at the many factors within a multi-site operation and hopefully identify those operations with true potential for commercial disaster and equally those with only superficial importance to long-term profitability and survival. Thus a fire in a small pattern store may have serious financial consequences to many production units, whilst the loss of one production unit may be offset by increased production at the remaining ones.
The concept is quite simple but the reality is that managers will have their own ideas of their unit's importance and forming an objective judgement is often difficult. Furthermore, market forces and internal changes tend to make some decisions obsolete and lead to unexpected exposures. Makes life interesting!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks once again to all.
During my research, I came across BS6266 which gives guidance on protecting electronic installations (data centres to you & me) from fire. http://shop.bsigroup.com.../?pid=000000000030012700
OK, not exactly what I was after, and not exactly cheap, but it does provide a rationale for establishing a system based on asset protection which I intend to convert into a procedure for this company
|
|
|
|
IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Assessing Property, Rather Than Life Protection.........
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.