Fire Door/Exit Markings

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:24 am

I little while ago I read an article on fire exit markings.
Please answer the following -

Q. Where are the sign indicating exits normally located?
A. At the head of the door casing.

Q. Where will the smoke go?
A. The smoke will rise to the highest place it can.

Q. What is the recommendation from the fire service if you are caught in a smoke filled environment?
A. Crawl on all fours to the nearest exit.

Q. How do you see the exit when the area that the signs are
placed will be covered by poisonous gasses/smoke?
A. Have the signs placed were you will see them. At eye level.
whilst on all fours.

What are your views should we use signs at low level?
If you are interested please view the following website: -
http://www.safe-t-first.com/

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:54 pm

Blimey what a blast from the past. I seem to remember a discussion about this many years ago. It was when luminescent material first started becoming available and the idea of placing an arrowed stripe above the skirting board first came to light. This was then followed by a discussion on floor markers and if I remember took up at least a day at a conference for emergency signage.

I still feel that the current regulations do not go far enough and also the differing knowledge of people specifying signage can be quite disturbing. I have always felt that the only reason that is was stipulated that signage should be placed higher was that ther old dodgers that did the inspections couldn't look down!

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:43 pm

An interesting question and one I have asked myself on a number of occassions.

If we draw from Health & Safety legislation rather than the Fire Precautions Act and other 'fire' legislation I would have to say "installing both types (levels) of signage would adequately demonstrate that in this respect, the company took all reasonable and practicable measures to reduce the risk of injury to its employees, visitors etc by having clearly marked fire exit points".

I would have to agree with Leon that current legislation pertaining to signage is no where near good enough.

Having said that, the last time you went to a company premises as a guest/visitor, were you breifed on the fire procedure, where you told 'if a bell sounds leave the building by the nearest safe route' - you should have been!

What type of signage is erected and the height of that signage will probably differ according to the premises. e.g. a warehouse needs high level signage due to racking, stored goods, equipment that would other wise obstruct the view of signage if it were placed lower down. In an office type environment, then yes, go for dual level signage - running man about fire doors and arrows much lower down.

Having said all that, if you are in a 'smoke filled environment', something is seriously wrong with the fire alarm/ detection system - it should have activated much earlier!

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:03 pm

The wisdom of John. He puts into wordsw what us lesser mortals have in our heads.

Slight problem with the fire alarm argument, not all buildings have to have detectors. Schools for example only have to be protected to P1 or maybe P2 which is basically call points. I recently sureveyed a primary school and have just installed over £650 worth of signage. They had been inspected twice and all they were told was it needed improving. If this has been a business they would have been issued an order.

As for visitor instructions this is recently something that has hit home. I am designing a badge for my offices that shows the relevant information on the back. Unfortunately the simple signing in and out can be the bit that was missed. Two weeks ago a member of my staff died of menengitus. The then trying to collate who had been in the building was a mammoth task and highlighted the lack procedures that we had in place. Even I had forgotten to sign in a visitor. Just shows even the best of us can be complacent.

Honorary Member Joined: May 09, 2003 Posts: 45

It is all about risk and good procedures. Many of our clients are now running fire drills and bomb drills regularly and I would always advocate the luminescent tape on the carpet to identify the routes of escape.

Depending on the contruction of the building, smoke can build up quickly so the more emergency signage and lighting the better.

Under the new legislation for disabled people including partially sighted and those who are physically disabled it is a good idea to review your polices and look at the location of those employees, placing those with sight or mobility problems nearer the exit may save lives in the event of there being a fire.

People with asthma or other breathing difficulties also need to be given special consideration.

Bob Edwards
Lime One Ltd

Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2004 8:48 pm

As usual, Bob offers some very sound advice.

I don't know about the others but I'm siting here disgusted with myself for not even having considered the needs of the disabled or those who have respiratory problems in my earlier post.

Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:30 am

It is at times very easy to have a seemingly good idea/train of thought, but as John has pointed out it can sometimes have some vital flaws, what better way of finding these flaws than asking people that can sit back and review the problem, give their honest appraisal of the topic without and fear of reprisals – everyone wins Wink

Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2004 1:54 pm

How very true. Personally my risk assesment and fire survey completion does incorporate all the above factors. Especially as 90% of mine are primary schools there is also the "stupid child" factor to consider.

My rule of thumb when completing a report and sticking a price on the end is to remind the client of one simple fact. What is the price of life. Always seems more relevant as all the work I do is voluntary so they know they are already getting a good deal.