IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Bonded Warehouses: Compartmentation vs Ventilation
Rank: New forum user
|
Hello all,
I am looking for some advice. This is in relation to a bonded spirit maturation warehouse storing spirits in wooden casks. The warehouse is comprised of multiple compartments, though work is required to make them compliant. There are 2 sets of requirements in relation to fire compartmentation, from SBS Technical handbook, for a Storage Facility Class 1:
- Compartments must be a maximum of 1000 sq m - Compartments must have 120min fire resistance However, DSEAR requires adequate ventilation. HSG51 suggests natural ventilation by way of air bricks at high and low levels to a total of 1% of the wall & ceiling surface area. However in several of the compartments, 3 of the walls are adjacent to ather compartments, and could not vent directly to open air. Additionally, if vents were to be put in between compartments, that would negate the 120min fire compartment which has been created?
Advice and help appreciated, Grant
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Grant, HSG51 offers a range of solutions and a hierarchy for applying them effectively. Firstly, you are correct that adding vents between compartments isn’t advisable. Not only does this breach fire compartmentation, but it also reduces natural ventilation per square metre of opening. So, what are the options? If you have an external wall, consider placing all your vents on that wall. This will require a larger vent area, and it’s essential to maintain a suitable separation distance between the lower and upper vent areas. HSG51 refers to BS 5259 as a relevant standard for calculating the required vent sizes and spacing. Install suitable mechanical ventilation in each compartment (see Appendix 2, HSG51). As a last resort, you could install vents between compartments protected by fire shutters rated for 120 minutes. These should be connected to the fire detection system and equipped with a fusible link for automatic activation.
Another crucial factor to consider is the potential requirement for explosion relief. Typically, flammable storage buildings incorporate a ‘fragile’ or ‘weaker’ roof design, ensuring that, in the event of an internal explosion, the force is directed upwards. This approach helps to prevent damage to the main structural components of the building, preserving its integrity.
The real question remains, however: is this warehouse appropriate for storing flammable materials? It’s likely that the facility wasn’t originally designed for this purpose; otherwise, this issue would not have arisen. Hope it helps, Tony. Edited by user 31 October 2024 08:29:52(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
1 user thanked antbruce001 for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Grant I wonder whether these might be warehouse buildings which have been around for decades. Often with asbestos cement roofs and walls. Plenty such in Scotland. May be the Scotch Whisky Association has guidance specific to such sites. Health & Safety in the Scotch Whisky industry
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
DSEAR doesn't mandate ventilation it is a suggested mitigation measure it suggests natural or mechanical ventilation....since you don't want a domino onto the next compartment you need the 120 min wall and early warning which is why most of the maturation warehouses I have seen have a VESDA, and fire suppression. I hope that helps for now...
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
While DSEAR doesn’t mandate ventilation outright, it does take ventilation levels into account when determining the appropriate Zone classification. For a flammable storage room with 'normal' ventilation—typically classified as medium dilution with fair availability—a Zone 2 designation is usually appropriate, provided containers remain sealed. However, if ventilation is restricted or unreliable, the Zone classification may be elevated to Zone 1 or even Zone 0. This escalation imposes more stringent requirements for controlling potential ignition sources, particularly regarding the necessary EX-rating for any electrical equipment within or entering the room. Additionally, limited ventilation runs counter to established good practice and the guidance in HSG51.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
and HSG51 also says - alternative measures can be used so long as they provide the equivalent level of safety...dear oh dear...
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Steve, Why the sarcasm? Both para 169 & 186 of HSG51 state "Adequate ventilation is required in buildings/rooms used for storing flammable liquids to ensure the safe dispersal of flammable vapours". As you say HSG51 does allow for alternatives, and these were included in my original post. These are the ones HSG51 itself states as suitable. At no point do I say any of the options are required, just these are possible ways to achieve the guidance provided by the HSE. The title for the post "Compartmentation vs Ventilation' suggests a question of which is more important, but in reality, the question should be 'Compartmentation AND Ventilation' as both are required. Hopefully, we can let this drop now.
|
|
|
|
IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Bonded Warehouses: Compartmentation vs Ventilation
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.