Testing emergency lighting

[westward10]

What photometric data do you provide, see BS5266:1 2016.

 

[Adam W]

What photometric data do you provide, see BS5266:1 2016.

See posts #16 and #20.

 

[Deleted account]

I don't have a copy of BS5266 and I'm not about to fork out £122 for one, but I'd like to think I'm competent to turn a switch off and on again once a month, and I'm even willing to initial to say I've done it.

The way I see it emergency light testing is like fire alarm testing or even PAT testing (ISI&TEE) - you're not designing a system, just testing it, and a caretaker could do that.

Again, I haven't done a special course and got a certificate to say I can design an emergency lighting system, but I can integrate emergency lighting into the primary lighting system, and in a situation where nobody else is going to consider emergency lighting until it's too late I'd be happy to put my neck on the line. Same with the testing of it - I'm happy to take that on if nobody else will.

Hi Adam w,

I've feel I must disagree. I have no quals in emergency lighting also, but suspect I may be able to test correctly,

But the reason I wouldn't do this job (just because I suspect I could do it )is I don't know what I don't know.

there are parts of this job I may be ignorant of so it would be unfair and wrong to charge a customer for works I am not compitant in doing.

Thinking your compitant or suspecting your compitant does not make you compitant.

If I where to take on a job such as this I would at the very least get a copy of bs5266 and go on a course.

 

[Leyland30]

It’s all in BS5266:12016.

 

[suffolkspark]

Its an awkward one as i have worked in several buildings where the emergency lighting is checked monthly in house by designated office staff, who were not say competant to design a system but they could flick a key switch and see if they lit or not. Im sure if you had in writing that you are literally carrying out functional or a 3hr test only and that if compliance of that system with bs5266 needs to be confirmed then somebody competant to do so should be appointed if so required?

I don't see how that leaves you open to any liability as your only doing as asked and have made clear that that task doesnt nescacerily (sp?) mean it complies with relevant regs?

 

[Taylortwocities]

In my experience, the monthly functional test can be carried out by the cleaner, who ticks off a log sheet.
But
Initial certification and the required 12-monthly soak/discharge checks must be done by someone who knows the requirements.
Passing the “17th Edition” does not make you competent wrt Em Lighting.

 

[gnuuser]

Thanks. I am competent. I just was not 100% sure of the implications and requirements.
I will take a look Monday and make an informed judgement.

here is where your code books come into play, different designs and setups can preset different requirements and amendments to code and are generally detailed in the code books.
when i had to inspect at work I carried a copy of the specific pages of the code book right with the clip board (even though i had them memorized).
our company would do the initial inspection with 1 inspector ( a master) and 2 witnesses (usually a journeyman and an apprentice)
subsequent inspections were done by the qualified journeyman and apprentice to verify the system continues to operate and hasn't been altered in any way. Proper documentation was required and the company was fined if it wasn't done correctly.

as others have stated if you are unsure you shouldn't do the inspection or at least have a copy of the pertinent regs to refer to.

 

[Nigel]

If you are testing emergency lighting systems then you should be competent and understand the implications of BS5266: Part 1.

There should be a log book for the system(s) and you would be signing this log book to confirm that the installation is, and continues to be, compliant with the various requirments.

If you don't know about this, then don't do it. If there's a fire and the occupants of this public building cannot get out because your "certified" emergency lights don't work, then it will be YOUR dangly bits on the chopping block when the courts come to pin the blame on somebody.

Just saying.....

You sign the logbook to say you have inspected. Not that it is compliant.

 

[Nigel]

I suggest you refuse to do it too. 17th edition and BS7671 has nothing to do with emergency lighting.
You aren’t competent in this particular area.

The Standards states that the installation must also meet BS7671.

 

[Nigel]

I don't have a copy of BS5266 and I'm not about to fork out £122 for one, but I'd like to think I'm competent to turn a switch off and on again once a month, and I'm even willing to initial to say I've done it.

The way I see it emergency light testing is like fire alarm testing or even PAT testing (ISI&TEE) - you're not designing a system, just testing it, and a caretaker could do that.

Again, I haven't done a special course and got a certificate to say I can design an emergency lighting system, but I can integrate emergency lighting into the primary lighting system, and in a situation where nobody else is going to consider emergency lighting until it's too late I'd be happy to put my neck on the line. Same with the testing of it - I'm happy to take that on if nobody else will.

Everything wrong with our industry in a single post right here.

 

[Nigel]

Any competent Electrician can install, test and maintain an emergency lighting system.
It takes a bit more info to design or to state whether an existing system complies.

Part of the testing is to verify an existing design is in place and that it is current.

 

[Adam W]

Everything wrong with our industry in a single post right here.

You flick a switch and see if the lights come on. It isn't rocket science.

 

[Nigel]

You flick a switch and see if the lights come on. It isn't rocket science.

Clueless.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Part of the testing is to verify an existing design is in place and that it is current.

Sorry, that would be initial verification.
Monthly or annual testing, battery duration testing and functional testing do not require verification of design.
Any alterations which could affect the existing design, such as new walls, different colour scheme, etc, should result in a revised design at the time of the alteration.

 

[westward10]

I would estimate 99% of emergency lighting installations I test or assess for FRAs are not and have never been compliant with not only current but the standards they should have been installed to at the time, you can also include fire alarm systems to this. I find it bewildering that people berate those who undertake electrical work without a sound underpinning of the requirements and yet will happily install safety systems with the same ignorance.

 

[westward10]

Monthly or annual testing, battery duration testing and functional testing do not require verification of design.

Annex K of BS5266:1 provides a Certificate for this exact purpose.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

I would estimate 99% of emergency lighting installations I test or assess for FRAs are not and have never been compliant with not only current but the standards they should have been installed to at the time, you can also include fire alarm systems to this. I find it bewildering that people berate those who undertake electrical work without a sound underpinning of the requirements and yet will happily install safety systems with the same ignorance.

In many instances, the installer is installing to a design supplied by another.
Cables is cables whether it’s for power and lighting, emergency lighting or fire alarms.
Such installers don’t need to know the maximum height of a void above a ceiling before a smoke head has to be installed.
They don’t need to know whether the head should be heat or ionisation.
They don’t need to know the minimum distance from a wall, or from light fittings and other equipment.
They don’t need to know when an emergency exit sign should be maintained or non-maintained.

Yes knowing such things would be useful, but as long as they install as per the design, everything should be ticketyboo.

 

[westward10]

In many instances, the installer is installing to a design supplied by another.
Cables is cables whether it’s for power and lighting, emergency lighting or fire alarms.
Such installers don’t need to know the maximum height of a void above a ceiling before a smoke head has to be installed.
They don’t need to know whether the head should be heat or ionisation.
They don’t need to know the minimum distance from a wall, or from light fittings and other equipment.
They don’t need to know when an emergency exit sign should be maintained or non-maintained.

Yes knowing such things would be useful, but as long as they install as per the design, everything should be ticketyboo.

That may be the case but this does not change the fact a multitude of systems are not compliant. Assessing whether AFDs are required in voids can only be known if the Category of system is known. Minimum spacing from walls and luminaires is a basic requirement for any Category of system.

 

[Adam W]

I would estimate 99% of emergency lighting installations I test or assess for FRAs are not and have never been compliant with not only current but the standards they should have been installed to at the time, you can also include fire alarm systems to this. I find it bewildering that people berate those who undertake electrical work without a sound underpinning of the requirements and yet will happily install safety systems with the same ignorance.

Perhaps, as you seem to be suggesting, nobody considered themselves sufficiently competent to upgrade it, so just left it alone.

 

[bigspark17]

If you are annual or monthly testing you do not need to verify the design. Comments should be noted on test certificate & log book. If the fire risk assesment deems it an unsatisfactory design then that will force the client to take action.
Annual test you are there to test that the battery withstands the 3hr test without the light fading. No new exits or walls are apparant and the general el install, i would always comment if no easily accesible key switch is readily available but wouldnt give an unsatisfactory if there wasnt one.