Shedding light on the EN54-23 standard for Beacons
Mark Thomson
KAC
What is so special about 01 January 2014?
01 January 2014 is the critical date after which any Visible Alarm Device (VAD) newly installed and
used as the primary means of warning as part of a fire alarm system must, under the CPR, conform to
EN54-23. Much has already been published on this topic and its introduction has posed a significant
challenge to alarm device manufacturers. The challenge has been accepted by the industry, which
has responded with the development of new designs, usually employing innovative electrical and
optic technology, which can be certified as meeting the requirements of the standard.
The key driver behind the introduction of the new requirements is the Equalities Act. The product
standard is designed to ensure that, as far as is practical, the fire system will generate an effective
warning for all occupants of a building, particularly people with hearing difficulties, in the event of a
fire.
Why has EN54-23 been issued?
Traditionally, the primary fire alarm warning mechanism has been the audible sounder. Recently, it
has become usual for the sounders to be supported by visible alarms, which have only ever been
intended to be secondary reinforcements for the audible alarms. However, driven by the disability
legislation, if light is used as a primary warning, it must now be effective in alerting the deaf or hard
of hearing to the emergency. Similarly, in high ambient noise environments where workers are
wearing ear defenders, the same need can arise. In addition, today’s consumer technology and
peoples’ lifestyles mean that many people regularly use in-ear speakers to listen to music, so they
may not hear an external sounder.
What does EN54-23 provide?
EN54-23 gives an independent assessment of beacons’ performance in the same way that EN53-3
does for sounders. With this standard, systems designers, risk assessors, installers etc. can assess
what the requirement of a beacon must be in order to deal with a particular application and then
have confidence in choosing the right device for the job. For example, compliant beacons and
sounder beacons are designed for areas where people with hearing difficulties may be alone,
environments with high levels of ambient noise and areas with restricted access.
W, C and O category requirements.
The committee that developed EN54-23 are to be applauded for their approach, which, as they well
knew, would require a fundamental change in visible alarm technology to ensure that the light
output from warning beacons was sufficiently bright to attract attention. Their solution was to
develop three categories: W, wall; C, ceiling, and O open. The key performance indicators are that
the output of the device must be greater than one candela, (cd) and less than 500 cd; the flash rate
must be between 0.5 and 2.0Hz. The critical requirement from a manufacturer’s point of view is that
each model must be tested to demonstrate compliance with the standard’s requirements. For
ceiling-mounted devices, the manufacturer must define the maximum height at which it can be
installed, set by the standard 3, 6 or 9 metres. A wall-mounted device must be installed at a
minimum of 2.4m from the floor in the same way as a sounder is today. The coverage volume,
defined by the manufacturer, is that in which the output meets the minimum illumination
requirement of 0.4 lumens/m2 (lux) on a perpendicular surface. To avoid having to install an
unacceptable large number of beacons, manufacturers are typically designing to meet smoke
detector spacings. The result is that W class devices are assessed in terms of the dimensions of the
cube of light they cover and C devices are assessed as the diameter of a cylinder of light. The
coverage of an O class device is a cuboid of light, defined by the manufacturer as independent of the
EN54-23 height/placement requirements.
A further important consideration is that if the risk assessment does not specify a VAD for a
particular area, it will still be acceptable to install a non-compliant beacon as a supplementary
indicator to a sounder.
What does it mean for the fire industry?
Manufacturers
A huge investment in new product development has been made by all the major warning device
suppliers, and, by the cut-off date, there will be a wide choice of compliant devices available. As
would be expected the designs and their features vary, so from the competitive point of view, the
situation is unchanged.
Arguably, the key criteria are area of coverage, current draw and ease of installation. For example, in
KAC’s new modular ENScape range, a single device is suitable for both wall and ceiling installation.
The design is symmetrical, so, as there is no need for orientation, installation time is reduced to a
minimum. It offers a first fix capability, allowing electrical continuity testing prior to device fit, a
common base with large cable entries and a choice of either standard or deep bases (IP65). There are
a choice of white or red light colours and a choice of lens colours: clear for EN54-23 fire applications
and red and amber for security system use.
System houses
As is currently the case, it will be the responsibility of the fire system designer, responding to the risk
assessment for a specific building, to calculate the positioning and number of detectors, call points
and audible and visible alarm devices required to provide adequate coverage to protect the
building’s occupants.
As might be expected when there is a major change to standards that affect such a complex matter
as fire system design, there is considerable discussion in the industry about what changes will be
required from the introduction date. Reputable suppliers and system houses have already conducted
in-depth discussion sessions with risk assessors and specifiers and are offering design tools or setting
up CPD approved programmes to advise the industry of the implications of the changes.
Risk assessors and specifiers
Disability legislations such as The Equalities Act is the key driver for the new requirements, and it will
be interesting to see how specifiers and risk assessors respond to the introduction of the new
standard. For example, will compliant beacons as well as sounders have to be installed in all
locations, or only those, such as hotel bedrooms or lavatories in commercial buildings where the
hard of hearing might be alone? In a public area, for example a hotel lobby, it could be argued that a
deaf person, even if he cannot hear the sounders, will be alerted by the sight of other people moving
rapidly to the exit. Specifiers will obviously have to include a clause in tender documents requiring
that where VADs provide a primary warning, they must conform to EN54-23.
Alternative solutions
The preferred option to alert hearing impaired people that an emergency exists and an evacuation is
about to occur are flashing beacons installed as part of the fire alarm system or perhaps a paging
system. However, in rooms intended for sleeping, visual alarm devices may be considered to be
ineffective in waking sleeping people and a tactile device such as a vibrating pager could be used for
people with hearing difficulties.
Recommendations on the planning, design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of systems
using visual alarm devices complying with BS EN 54-23 are given in the joint BRE/FIA Code of
Practice, CoP 0001, which can be downloaded from www.redbooklive.com/pdf/CoP-0001.pdf
So, what do we all need to do now?
The fire industry supports any initiative that improves the effectiveness of its life safety products. The
introduction of the new product standard for VADs that defines the effective operating areas of the
devices is a major step forward in meeting the requirements of the Equalities Act. Without doubt,
the introduction of a major new standard always raises a considerable number a questions during
the initial implementation phase. Already the AV device manufacturers have risen to the challenge
with the development of new products, and without doubt, the risk assessors and systems
integrators will do the same.
It is very clear that from 01 January 2014, any VAD newly installed in a fire system and used as a
primary warning device must, under the CPR, conform to EN54-23. Reputable VAD manufacturers
have responded with new designs that have been third party tested to EN54-23. System integrators
will ensure that the VADs in their systems will have the necessary approvals.
At this early stage before the implementation date, there are a number of grey areas, primarily
associated with interpretation and subsequent implementation. The potential uncertainty arises
during the process in which the person responsible for the building commissions a risk assessment,
which is then turned into a tender document against which the system is designed, installed and
commissioned. There will inevitably be a degree of interpretation in the risk assessment as to which
areas of a building need to have both sounders and strobes; indeed, the need will vary according to
the level of occupancy and use on a building-by-building basis. There can be no hard and fast rules,
each assessment will be made on the specific circumstances.
As a major manufacturer of AV warning devices, KAC has taken the opportunity of a step change in
the product specifications to develop its new ENscape family of sounders and beacons. AV devices
from different manufacturers will inevitably vary in their specification and performance. The design
brief for KAC’s ENscape family demanded EN54-23 compliance, fast installation and safe evacuation
as the primary requirements; the resulting product does exactly that - and more.
The mandatory date for EN54-23 implementation is only a few short months away. Systems
integrators need to have a clear understanding of the capabilities of the VADs from their chosen
supplier. To ensure that their fire system design criteria take into account the coverage area
achievable by the device may initially appear to be complex, in fact, the VAD manufacturer has
already done the work. Providing the VAD manufacturer is a company that manufactures reliable
products and offers good technical support, meeting the new requirements in the field may be a
surprisingly simple process.