I recently did a fire risk assessment and one of the action items was my recommendation for a new extinguisher at the exit from the office, and close to the front exit.

The only person likely to use this extinguisher is a female who runs the company from that office.

I recommended a 6kg water extinguisher because of its lighter weight being more suitable for a female, she told me not to be sexist and purchased the heavier 9 litre type.

Perhaps you could have advised that size of an extinguisher because of her 'build' and not her sex? Would that be 'sizest'?

I used to work in the same warehouse as a woman who put most of the men to shame. She could lift a fully laden donkey if you asked her ( and that came from her!)

Or you could have said that the 6kg was 'suitable' for the risk.



Andy

Good point; also supported by Figure 23 is the HSE Guidance on the Manual Handling Operations Regulations.

Regards

Why are you supplying water extinguishers?

Slowly but surely we are removing ours and replacing them with AFFF which can be used on Class A+B fires and also have a conductivity rating of 35KV which means they can be safely used on live electrical office equipment (safety distance of 1 metre required).

Adrian

A word of caution here - not all AFFF can be used on live electrical equipment as described in the previous post, especially the old ones with a jet dispense and not a spray.

But yes - I would always prefer a foam type extinguisher over just a water one, the mess from the foaming agent is negligible in a fire situation me thinks.

You are correct - some manufactures 6 and 9 ltr extinguishers have the same fire ratings and your point is valid for the OP's question.

However, fire rating for extinguishers are categorised (e.g. 5 - 8 - 13 - 21 - 27A etc... (0.5M sticks of wood in each transverse section)) its possible that the 6tr just makes the 13A category but the 9ltr one doesn't quite make the 21A category so it is labelled as 13A, no doubt the extra 3 litres of water in the 9ltr extinguishers will perform better that the 6ltr albeit they have the same rating.

Note: Fire extinguisher ratings are not an exact science, for example, they are only tested on one combustible material (wood) amongst many other things.

When recommending the means of fighting fires in a building, or reviewing a FRA I will take many factors into consideration including the fire ratings of extinguishers, AND the fire loading of the building in which I think is crucial. Outside our file archive room (which is full of card and paper) their is a 9ltr 21A water extinguisher, which was changed from a 6ltr 13A extinguisher due to the fire loading of the archive room.

No offence intended here just trying to justify my posting in which I accept that it may have strayed from the OP.

I didn't say AFFF could be used on all electrical fires in fact I didn't say were AFFF could be used.

Apologies to you Invictus - I should have said 'a' previous post and not 'the' previous post. My response was aimed at #7 post.

FireSafety101,

Please don't take this as a criticism as that's not how it's meant, it's a genuine question which has bugged me for a while;

Why would somebody choose to put a water extinguisher in an office given that an office fire (in this day and age where smoking is banned) would almost certainly be caused via an electrical appliance?

We recently looked around a few offices (planning on moving) and most, if not all, still had water extinguishers so this appears to be quite a common thing.

I'm not a fire expert (I'm more a "jack of all trades" H&S guy) but i know enough to know that water and electricity don't mix well. Would an appropriately sized CO2 not be a better choice in an office environment?

Again, not a dig mate, just curious as to why you chose water?

Hi Chas,

I read a similar story in the paper recently where a house fire was caused from the sun reflecting off a mirror so i accept that its a possible source of ignition. However i think it's safe to say that this is very rare. In fact, it isn't even mentioned in the official stats I've available at www.gov.uk (i assume it would come under the "other" category. What the stats do show is the following statistics for causes of fires in "non-dwellings" in 2013/14:

-Total fires: 14,900
-Electrical Distribution: 2,900
-Electrical appliances: 2,700
-Cooking appliances: 2,600 (doesn't state what but would assume some electrical in there).

Out of the remaining 6,700 fires, most of the categories are things which would not normally be present in offices such as smoking (900), matches (200), welding equipment (400) etc so if you actually filter it down to "office specific" sources of ignition, electricity is by far the most common.

-Common sense tells us that the most likely source of ignition in an office is electrical
-Official stats also tell us that the most likely source of ignition in an office is electrical
-Water can't be used on electrical fires
-So why do people put water extinguishers in offices?

Stern

If you read my initial post you will see my recommendation is for a water extinguisher at the exit from the office and close to the front exit.

The reason for water is the area immediately outside the office is a lobby with four doors, as follows:
1. Ladies toilet, with paper towels and loo rolls and some items of clothing,
2. Entrance to engineering workshop with many CO2 and powder extinguishers,
3. Entrance to office, a small room with timber and vinyl furniture waste paper bins, plastic/electrical appliances, all recently tested so very slight fire risk, carpet, items of clothing, etc. etc.
4. Exit out to street.

My verbal recommendation was for the extinguisher to be sited in the lobby so available for use on the way out and to cover most of the hazards I considered at the time.

I could of course have recommended CO2 as well but decided not to as there are many of those inside the workshop and just on the "other side of the door".

Water can be used for electrical appliance fires, having first isolated the electric supply, that is just a point I mention, not one I recommend.

I hope this answers the question as to why water.

Flippin' 'eck 'essy not you as well !!!!!!!!

To add to your tirade men on building sites now carry lighter packs of cement, sand etc. undertake manual handling assessments and complain when they are asked to carry anything "too heavy" they use trucks to move around materials, as do store staff in supermarkets etc. etc. etc.

Workers at height use MEWPs instead of scaffold, ladders are left in/on the van, mobile canteens are on hire to enable all workers a nice break from work, some with showers and drying rooms for wet clothing.

Yes I know we have moved on into the 21st century where everyone is equal but equality has worked both ways.

As it happens I know the lady in question very well and there was no way any offence was to be taken.

I shall now take home my bat and ball, never to be played with again.

FS101

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting your closing threat at #25 by asking you to think again if you are serious about ceasing to be an active user of this forum, i.e. someone who starts threads or posts responses unlike passive users who simply read threads and either rarely or never contribute. Some of us enjoy your postings as part of the 'rich tapestry' of content on this forum!

One snag with this forum is that users can interpret postings in various ways. I guess that some of us were correct in interpreting your original post as little more than a humorous anecdote about someone's reaction to advice you gave during work. Therefore, on a general note for you and other active users, it's advisable to use exclamation marks, smileys, frownies and/or choose wording which may help to reduce the risk of humorous content being misinterpreted as serious.

Also, it seems that some or many IOSH members are not aware that the Members Forum on this website was split into three last year and now includes a Social Forum intended for light-hearted topics and banter. Also, in general, the active users of the Social Forum tend to be more courteous to others in their postings than some people on this (public) discussion forum. Therefore, for IOSH members who haven't logged on for a while, why not do so and have a look to see what you are missing on the Member Forums? Apologies to non-IOSH members who use this forum but obviously won't have access to the Member Forums. Some things in life are exclusive and that includes access to the IOSH Member Forums!!

p.s. To avoid misinterpretation, I had better add that my definition of passive users above was intended as neutral rather than derogatory. There are a number of valid reasons why some users never post on this forum or rarely do so.

In support of Firesafety101,
CO2 are good in offices but mostly for surface fires and are not rated for class A- combustible solids. Take a sofa or seat for example, smoldering deep into the cushions would not be extinguished by CO2. CO2 does not remove the heat element from a fire. Water extinguishers with additives can be bought where they have a conductivity rating of 35Kv so would be perfectly acceptible in this scenario.
Kevin

In my experience, if you use a C02 on a paper fire in an office environment you are likely to blow burning paper and embers all over the place resulting in potential fire spread. Water or foam for carbonaceous! Decent fire awareness training should point out the difference between classes of fire and the type of extinguishers to be used on them but of course then you still have to rely on someone making a conscious decision in an emergency situation. I can't see an issue with a water extinguisher if it is accompanied by a C02. Our ladies didn't bat an eyelid by the way.

I stayed in oneof the well known hotels at the weekend and noticed all the water extinguishers are 6litre.