Water Attenuation for fire fighting purposes - Rural Area

prewtna

Hi

If this is in the wrong place please feel free to send me packing somewhere else!

I have rural project approaching Substantial Completion. A condition of the Fire Cert was to provide a certain capacity of water in attenuation tanks for fire fighting purposes because the pressure in the water main is too low for fire fighting. A big expense, but fair enough.

My question is - has anyone else done this before and if so what spec / type of manhole / access cover did you provide for the tank(s) to allow the fire services come along and access it (drop their hoses into) to pump the water via their truck to the fire? Is there a standard opening / manhole the Fire Services expect when they arrive? Also what type of Signage would they expect to see?

I have been 'chasing' the Fire Officer who granted the Fire Cert for a response / answer but no calls returns nor emails responded to nor letters acknowledged as of yet.

To pre-empt some answers / queries - there is a fire hydrant provided on the water main but that is more for future proofing for when the pressure in the main is brought up to a decent standard and while they can connect to the water main there it will do them no good really for fire fighting. Our civil / structural engineer hasn't come across this before and is also 'chasing' fire officers in other local authority areas for some guidance.

Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

sydthebeat

I have experienced an unused tanker being accepted as attenuation, if i recall correctly, it was a few years ago in an industrial estate with no public mains.

There is the usual recommendations regarding proper connection fixings, heights etc.

prewtna

Glad to see its not a totally unusual situation!

You will have to forgive my ignorance, when you refer to 'the usual recommendations regarding proper connection fixings, heights etc.', where would i source them?

Given this is an underground attenuation tank, heights etc for access kind of don't come into it really? Our understanding was that they would drop in their hoses or maybe a submersible pump on arrival in the event of a fire (as if they were using water from a lake or river).

Our concern is allowing enough room to drop in such equipment while preventing someone falling in (and potentially drowning in the tank un-noticed during the mayhem of a fire event).

Until we get an answer from the Fire Officer, we are going to put in a 200mm square steel mesh (probably made from 18mm dia re-bar) immediately below the manhole to stop this happening, but until such time as the Fire Officer gives us a proper steer as to what he expects, then the Cert of Substantial Competion will not issue.

sydthebeat

I will review the file tomorrow and let you know what was agreed

No6

prewtna wrote: »

Hi

If this is in the wrong place please feel free to send me packing somewhere else!

I have rural project approaching Substantial Completion. A condition of the Fire Cert was to provide a certain capacity of water in attenuation tanks for fire fighting purposes because the pressure in the water main is too low for fire fighting. A big expense, but fair enough.

My question is - has anyone else done this before and if so what spec / type of manhole / access cover did you provide for the tank(s) to allow the fire services come along and access it (drop their hoses into) to pump the water via their truck to the fire? Is there a standard opening / manhole the Fire Services expect when they arrive? Also what type of Signage would they expect to see?

I have been 'chasing' the Fire Officer who granted the Fire Cert for a response / answer but no calls returns nor emails responded to nor letters acknowledged as of yet.

To pre-empt some answers / queries - there is a fire hydrant provided on the water main but that is more for future proofing for when the pressure in the main is brought up to a decent standard and while they can connect to the water main there it will do them no good really for fire fighting. Our civil / structural engineer hasn't come across this before and is also 'chasing' fire officers in other local authority areas for some guidance.

Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

Why do they want them underground? the norm in Mayo at least is overground steel water storage tanks with the hose connections located externally, they just drive up and clip on the hose.

prewtna

My understanding is that based on the fact that the required capacity was just shy of 13,000 gallons, the physical size of the tank(s) meant the notion of having them (it) overground was never really considered as a satisfactory solution especially when they would have to be located somewhere 'handy' for the fire service to access from their hard-standing - probably the front of the building.

The Fire Officer has since reverted so the matter is being resolved as we speak!

Many thanks for your input.

sydthebeat

this is what we had accepted

(3) It is proposed to construct a fixed static water storage tank as located on enclosed site location plan. This tank shall be sized in accordance with BS 5588 part 11: article 40.9.2. This tank shall have a capacity of 67,500 litres.

in essence its an over ground tanker like youd see an articulated truck pulling.
It was to be fitted with proper couplings so that the fire services could connect to it.

a hell of a lot cheaper than building a below ground storage tank

prewtna

Thanks syd.

In relation to the capacity of the tanks they accepted that it could be reduced on the basis that the existing water main would provide a portion of the required 'three firefighting jets at a total rate of 1 500 l/min for 45 min' and the tanks would make up the balance.

agreed - the over-ground option would be a lot cheaper but we took the view that in the grand scheme of things the extra cost for the underground tanks was worth the €'s especially on a new build. Importantly the client was in agreement.