Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
mikeeeeeboy  
#1 Posted : 26 August 2018 08:29:43(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mikeeeeeboy

i recently up graded our fire alarm system in the main building at my work with the aid of a third party fire alarm contractor and part of this process was to check the db levels in all rooms during normal working hours ,  to ensure it complied with the minimum requirement of 65dbs. The office building tested is shared occupancy and the testing lasted approximately 15 minutes to allow the engineer to carry out the tests . As you can imagine i had a few complaints but its been taken even further stating that it is now an occupational issue due to an employee sat right under a fire alarm sounder bell . I was under the understanding that the avareage sounder larm is 100db and thus with 15 minutes of noise exposure would give a daily exposure of this employee of 85db the upper exposure level . Regarding the information above do you think that the employee has a case for over exposure to noise given that the area they work in is an office and therefore never over the average office environment of 50-60db 

I look forward to your responses 

Thanks 

Kate  
#2 Posted : 26 August 2018 08:56:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

If a fire alarm sounder was tested right above my desk for 15 minutes I would down tools (lock the computer) and walk away until it had finished!  These things are ear-splitting, I don't understand how anyone could bear it.

So my question is, did they really stay there?

mikeeeeeboy  
#3 Posted : 26 August 2018 09:03:38(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mikeeeeeboy

Hi Kate , 

Point well made . I would not stick around either . All employees were warned of the tests to be carreid out 

Thomo  
#4 Posted : 26 August 2018 10:27:41(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Thomo

Email the engineer and ask them what levels where at the time of the test and tell him why you are asking.

You need to test the alarm db level and db at the location of the ip or use the 3db rule and distance to find out the real answer,

A full 15mins of 100db then yes you have over exposed someone and will be liable.

Next time clear the building and provide ear protection, training for critical staff only to remain.

No such thing as common sense but apparently there is Life Skills :-)

Edited by user 27 August 2018 05:30:37(UTC)  | Reason: alter advice

thanks 1 user thanked Thomo for this useful post.
mikeeeeeboy on 28/08/2018(UTC)
SBH  
#5 Posted : 26 August 2018 13:01:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
SBH

Get the contractor back in and tell them to reduce the sounder level or relocate the sounder - simple

SBH

thanks 1 user thanked SBH for this useful post.
mikeeeeeboy on 28/08/2018(UTC)
toe  
#6 Posted : 26 August 2018 21:55:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

First question is, why are you under the impression an average fire alarm is 100db(A)? I seriously doubt it, unless you are over compliant with the number of sounders in the premises.

The next question is, if the alarm engineers were recording sound pressure to ensure compliance, did you ask them what the reading was where this employee was located. I am sure that it’s likely that the db(A) reading would be in the range of 65-70db(A) and therefore they may not have been overexposed.

toe  
#7 Posted : 26 August 2018 22:05:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

Originally Posted by: Thomo Go to Quoted Post

You need to test the alarm db level and db at the location of the ip or use the 3db rule and distance to find out the real answer,

A full 15mins of 100db then yes you have over exposed someone and will be liable.

Next time clear the building and provide ear protection, training for critical staff only to remain.

No such thing as common sense but apparently there is Life Skills :-)

Wording such as ip (Injured Party) and will be liabile, is concerning to read with such limited information from the OP.

Also, alarm sounders should be tested with ambiant noise during normal working hours, clearing the building may sound like a good idea, but may defeat the objective of the testing the sounders in the first place.

Edited by user 26 August 2018 22:06:20(UTC)  | Reason: correction

thanks 1 user thanked toe for this useful post.
mikeeeeeboy on 28/08/2018(UTC)
Thomo  
#8 Posted : 27 August 2018 05:34:43(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Thomo

Originally Posted by: toe Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Thomo Go to Quoted Post

You need to test the alarm db level and db at the location of the ip or use the 3db rule and distance to find out the real answer,

A full 15mins of 100db then yes you have over exposed someone and will be liable.

Next time clear the building and provide ear protection, training for critical staff only to remain.

No such thing as common sense but apparently there is Life Skills :-)

Wording such as ip (Injured Party) and will be liabile, is concerning to read with such limited information from the OP.

Also, alarm sounders should be tested with ambiant noise during normal working hours, clearing the building may sound like a good idea, but may defeat the objective of the testing the sounders in the first place.

Assumption is the mother of all ……………..

Fire alarms can be as loud as 120db.

Toe like you I assume the Engineer IP2 who you identify as OP (operation or Radio Operator) is good at their job and sees a normal office layout so sets his alarm at 75db then goes off to do his tests, on the other hand he might be a bad at their job so sees it’s a large open warehouse with a computer desk in the corner and lots of printers so thinks I will just have one really loud alarm.

Ref to clearing the building 1 person sat at a desk isn’t critical staff/ however if that person is using a loud printer then they could be for the assessment so should remain and 1 typist on their own minimal noise, 10 typists in a room x the db considerably so they would be crucial to the assessment.

Your first comment is spot on, just the second wasnt.

My use of IP is: Identified Person or Parties but it could mean Intoxicated Person, Intellgent Person, Internet Provider………………Think I will leave that spelling mistake in just for the picture straighters

thanks 1 user thanked Thomo for this useful post.
mikeeeeeboy on 28/08/2018(UTC)
toe  
#9 Posted : 28 August 2018 07:22:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

Thomo, apoligise for the confusion, it seems I have been on these forums for way too long.

On here, we normally refer to an Injured Party as IP and OP means the Origional Post, i.e. the person who created the thread.

I must admit, I have teasted loads of fire alarm system in my time and very rarely have I recorded over 100db(A).

thanks 2 users thanked toe for this useful post.
mikeeeeeboy on 28/08/2018(UTC), Thomo on 29/08/2018(UTC)
A Kurdziel  
#10 Posted : 28 August 2018 12:05:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

As Kate said I cannot imagine any one staying at their desk (and I assuming working) with that racket going on above their heads. As to whether you are liable, the following points need to be made; what was the noise level at their ears?  Sounders are usually about 3 m up in the ceiling so the noise by the time it reached their ears would be lower. Secondly for them to sue you they would need to prove that they had suffered some sort of permanent hearing damage. Unlikely in this case.   

thanks 1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
mikeeeeeboy on 28/08/2018(UTC)
mikeeeeeboy  
#11 Posted : 28 August 2018 13:24:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mikeeeeeboy

Hey guys , thanks for your comments they were really helpful 

I have had the test results back and the reading are 62db as a minimum and 92 db maximum . The are the person was in situ was recorded at 83db . 

Bigmac1  
#12 Posted : 28 August 2018 19:21:18(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Bigmac1

As well as the noise level, I found myself asking, Why 15 minutes?  

toe  
#13 Posted : 28 August 2018 21:35:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

Originally Posted by: mikeeeeeboy Go to Quoted Post

Hey guys , thanks for your comments they were really helpful 

I have had the test results back and the reading are 62db as a minimum and 92 db maximum . The are the person was in situ was recorded at 83db . 

This is inkeeping with sound levels that I have recorded over the years - and now make complete sense.

Users browsing this topic
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.