PAT testing Fire Alarm control Panel?

[sxdave]

As (I believe) PAT testing includes fixed equipment connected to the electrical installation by an FCU (eg hand driers, built in ovens etc.) I have been trying to figure out if a Fire Alarm control Panel should be PAT tested and if so by who. Has this subject been addressed before? Does anyone have experience of this and can inform me of what they found/did? Thanks.

 

[buzzlightyear]

No you don't test fire alarms.unless you can cop for the fault you have put on it. E. G. board fry.

 

[sxdave]

No you don't test fire alarms.

Thanks buzzlightyear. Do you know who would test the fire alarm control panel for the sort of things PAT testing checks rather than the Fire Alarm system functionality?

 

[James]

A fire alarm is maintained and inspected by regular servicing and inspection normally.
what “pat” test are you concerned may be missed?

also, being not portable and normally embedded in the fabric of the building.
I would not compare it to say a hand drier or an oven,

these are items that are subject to usage, wear, and abuse. it is for that reason they should be inspected regularly.

 

[timhoward]

The supply of a fire alarm is covered by BS5389 (as well as BS7671 as we recently discussed on another thread). Of late they are wired in at least FP200 cable which is fairly resilient if installed correctly. As above, the servicing company will be keeping an eye on it.
As long as the sparks has confirmed R2 continuity to the FCU during the fixed wiring inspection, the earthing arrangements covered by a PAT test can be visually confirmed most of the time by noting a CPC is connected both ends. Checking the supply is adequate and not damaged is part of a fire alarm system inspection.

The only other PAT testing component would be IR testing the short supply cable , and the risk of this deteriorating when fixed in place is significantly lower than the risk of causing issues by disturbing it regularly.

I once saw someone fail an exam for sending 500v into a fire alarm panel when IR testing an installation. It didn't work afterwards!

 

[sxdave]

Thanks for your reply James. I accept that frequency of use etc is much lower than for hand dryers etc so risk is lower. I was coming at this from the point of view that the control panel is mains powered, mounted on the wall, is probably class I (not double insulated) and can be touched by anyone so could present a hazard if there were a fault.

 

[snowhead]

If you are going to delve into Fire alarms, Intruder alarms, Sprinklers even electrically operated doors etc, you'd better make sure you're Liability insurance is up to date, covers for such equipment and covers for what could potentially be a massive claim for disruption to business and potentially injury to persons if systems fail to do thier intended function.

 

[sxdave]

The supply of a fire alarm is covered by BS5389 (as well as BS7671 as we recently discussed on another thread). Of late they are wired in at least FP200 cable which is fairly resilient if installed correctly. As above, the servicing company will be keeping an eye on it.
As long as the sparks has confirmed R2 continuity to the FCU during the fixed wiring inspection, the earthing arrangements covered by a PAT test can be visually confirmed most of the time by noting a CPC is connected both ends. Checking the supply is adequate and not damaged is part of a fire alarm system inspection.

The only other PAT testing component would be IR testing the short supply cable , and the risk of this deteriorating when fixed in place is significantly lower than the risk of causing issues by disturbing it regularly.

I once saw someone fail an exam for sending 500v into a fire alarm panel when IR testing an installation. It didn't work afterwards!

Thanks for your reply timhoward. In the situation I am considering the Fire Alarm Control Panel along with the FCU and short length of fire resilient cable have been replaced sometime after the last EICR. So I think I should find a Minor works certificate from the Fire Alarm Control Panel Installer to cover this, would you agree?

 

[timhoward]

Thanks for your reply timhoward. In the situation I am considering the Fire Alarm Control Panel along with the FCU and short length of fire resilient cable have been replaced sometime after the last EICR. So I think I should find a Minor works certificate from the Fire Alarm Control Panel Installer to cover this, would you agree?

This is where pragmatism kicks in.
To be honest I think it's splitting hairs a bit and it's not worth the hassle of chasing up. If they changed an old white one for a new red one with a key (for example) then fair play to them for upgrading it to their latest regs.
If it's been done competently I'd move on.
On an EICR I'd just check the supply circuit as normal and check the connections at the FCU look ok.

I guess an analogy might be that I changed a cracked socket face for a new one I wouldn't do a MWC.

 

[sxdave]

This is where pragmatism kicks in.
To be honest I think it's splitting hairs a bit and it's not worth the hassle of chasing up. If they changed an old white one for a new red one with a key (for example) then fair play to them for upgrading it to their latest regs.
If it's been done competently I'd move on.
On an EICR I'd just check the supply circuit as normal and check the connections at the FCU look ok.

I guess an analogy might be that I changed a cracked socket face for a new one I wouldn't do a MWC.

Thanks again timhoward. I agree with what you say regarding pragmatism. I just wanted to raise the subject of a MWC to see how it went with you and possibly other people on the forum. The FCU has been replaced with a red one that needs a key to operate so to newer regs.

 

[sxdave]

If you are going to delve into Fire alarms, Intruder alarms, Sprinklers even electrically operated doors etc, you'd better make sure you're Liability insurance is up to date, covers for such equipment and covers for what could potentially be a massive claim for disruption to business and potentially injury to persons if systems fail to do thier intended function.

Thanks for replying snowhead. I agree the legal/liability/Insurance aspect could be a minefield. That is one of the reasons why I sought counsel from the forum.

 

[Lister1987]

Thanks for replying snowhead. I agree the legal/liability/Insurance aspect could be a minefield. That is one of the reasons why I sought counsel from the forum.

Generally (as others have said, maintenance of the alarm (and subsequent supply cable from board to panel would be covered by the fire alarm contractors.

4.4 (pg 37-38) of the latest ISITTEE guide gives examples of items exempt from ISITTEE testing where other maintenance regimes are in place. 5839-1 clause 45.3e details how the system is verified for continued use in relation to power supply from the mains, 45.3o also advises further checks to be undertaken if MI require it

 

[MJPD29]

A fire alarm is not a portable appliance.

 

[DPG]

A fire alarm is not a portable appliance.

Neither is a hand drier.

 

[buzzlightyear]

Neither is a hand drier

Especially when you trying to rip it off the wall having a bad hair day. Lol.

 

[loz2754]

The term PAT testing has been a misleading misnomer from the start.
Apart from the obvious grammatical error - Portable Appliance Testing testing....

It has always been the case that certain types of electrical equipment fall between fixed wiring testing (which is often only done to the point of connection of equipment eg an FCU), and so-called PAT testing ("a hand drier is not a portable appliance") and so the equipment never actually gets tested at all.

Which is why the 5th edition of the Code of Practice for In Service Inspection and Testing of Electrical Equipment (ISITEE) has thankfully dropped all references to the term "PAT Testing".

In certain situations, mainly in workplaces, it is essential that all items of electrical equipment, fixed or portable, are subjected to a risk assessment, and if necessary, to regular inspection and/or testing.

Where an item of equipment is clearly subject to another set of regulations, for example fire alarm panels, then the risk assessment will show that to be the case, and it will state who is responsible for testing it and how often, and where the records are kept.

This risk assessment approach may take a while to catch on, but it is clearly the direction we are being instructed to follow.

 

[Strima]

as above, PAT went out with the Arc, in-service inspection and testing of electrical equipment has been in for several years.

If you look at the definitions in the COP you will see this:

Looking at ‘electrical equipment’, this is actually defined in the Code as an “Any item for such purposes as generation, conversion, transmission, distribution or utilization of electrical energy, such as machines, transformers, equipment, measuring instruments, protective devices, wiring systems, accessories, appliances and luminaires.”. Electrical equipment, therefore, includes appliances such as washing machines and vacuums.

So any current using equipment either portable or fixed falls under the code of practice. As @Lister1987 has pointed out as the alarm system falls under another standard it will not require the green sticker slapped on it...

 

[oracle]

If you are going to delve into Fire alarms, Intruder alarms, Sprinklers even electrically operated doors etc, you'd better make sure you're Liability insurance is up to date, covers for such equipment and covers for what could potentially be a massive claim for disruption to business and potentially injury to persons if systems fail to do thier intended function.

As (I believe) PAT testing includes fixed equipment connected to the electrical installation by an FCU (eg hand driers, built in ovens etc.) I have been trying to figure out if a Fire Alarm control Panel should be PAT tested and if so by who. Has this subject been addressed before? Does anyone have experience of this and can inform me of what they found/did? Thanks.

I was testing an installation that had alterations and additions and found one circuit at the board that I was unable to identify. Continuity showed a load was connected but none of the Installers could identify it either.
I linked out to the line and neutral and did an IR test at 240 v and noted results.
A bit later the Installers said I could turn the power on and when I did the fire alarm activated and wouldn't reset.
The Installers said I must have damaged it with my testing and the customer asked who was going to pay for the repair. I told them to call the alarm company and if they could prove to me that I had damaged it I would pay for the call out.
The guy came, changed the battery and it worked. They asked how the battery was damaged and he said it was ten years old. I got paid and left with my head high.