Notes from Damansara Utama, Petaling Jaya

Power System Earth and EMC Earth

2010-04-02T18:11:00.000-07:00

Google Web Elements - Presentation

Malaysian Wiring Code MS1979:2007 is Now Mandatory!

2008-09-07T04:25:00.001-07:00

Wiring Standards & National Wiring Codes

With the adoption of the MS/IEC60364 "Wiring Installation for Building" in 2000, Malaysia, in conformity with other countries in the region are practitioners of a common wiring standard (China and Vietnam in particular are strong proponents of the IEC wiring standard). As the IEC60364 is drafted by a multi-lateral, international body, which was (and still is, though less so) Eurocentric in nature, the IEC60364 has to accommodate the multiple conditions of various (European) national standards. Due to this the IEC60364 tend , of necessity, to be performance-based in nature. By comparision the U.K. IEE 17th edition or BS7671 "Regulations for Electrical Installation", and U.S.A. NEC 2008 "National Electrical Code©" (or NFPA 70) tend to be prescriptive-based as these standards are compiled specifically for only one country.

After the publication of the MS/IEC 60364, Suruhanjaya Tenaga, convened an industry-wide work group sometime in 2003 to draft a national wiring code. This WG on national wiring, chaired by The Electrical and Electronics Association of Malaysia (Ir. Rocky Wong Hon Tang) has as their working brief:

To draft a national wiring code suited for Malaysia and not in conflict with current laws and regulations ('Electricity Supply Regulations').
To ensure compliance with MS/IEC60364.
To consider particular aspect of wiring practice NOT included in the MS/IEC60364 (principally prescriptive-based rules).
To provide a safety guide principally for residential installations catering to 'uninformed' consumers (who make up more than 80% of electricity consumers).

After 3 years of draft and public consultations and 2 more years of public gazette the following documents are now published:

MS 1979:2007 "Electrical Installation of Buildings – Code of Practice"

MS 1936:2006 :Electrical Installation of Building – Guide to MS IEC 60364"

The public announcement by Suruhanjaya Tenaga can be viewed in this circular dated 1st July 2008. This circular makes it mandatory that the Garis Panduan Pendawaian Elektrik (GPPE) (or "Guides to Electrical Wiring") be a basis for all wiring in residential buildings. The GPPE in turn takes as its basis MS1979, MS1936 and MS/IEC60364, a circuitious way of announcing that the 'cart' (GPPE) is the principal document which actually is powered by the 'horse' (MS1979 and MS1936).

MS 1979 – Quick Brief

As this post DO NOT propose to be a scholarly oevre on wiring installation (please PAY to attend seminars and workshops conducted by TEEAM, ACEM and IEM), I have to be of necessity brief. I will touch on the important points of the Code here.

The structure of MS1979 is a simple distillation of all the important prescriptions contained in MSIEC60364 which have direct relevance to wiring in residential buildings. Rule-based conditions are set-out in the MS1979 where only performance-based requirements are listed in the MSIEC60364. The final product is a very simple booklet containing individual "COP" (Code Of Practice) numbered COP1 to COP91.

The companion to the MS1979 is MS1936 which has a more expanded scope compared to the MS1979 as it covers all other L.V. installation under the MS60364.

A quick list of COP which are important for designers and installers are as follows:

COP05 – All metal enclosures of electrical appliances must be connected to a protective conductor. Water, gas pipes, strucutural metal parts of the buildings and ductings of airconditioning system must also be connected to the main equipotential bonding.
COP06 – Isolation on fault. Protection using RCD, fuse, CB etc. must comply with Ra x Ia < 50V
Ra = Resistance of earth electrode & protective conductor;
Ia = operating current of protective device (sensitivy of RCD and 5s current trip for inverse time relay).
50V is the safe contact voltage defined by IEC60749-1.
COP07 –Earthing resistance must be less than 10Ω for operation of RCD but resistance of less than 1Ω is targetted.

COP08 – Electrical equipment must be mounted within materials that can withstand temperatures produced (by the equipment).
COP10 – Water heaters or forced air heaters or steam generators must be equipped with over heating devices (i.e. use o/t cut-out etc.).
COP12 – In > I_B,
COP13 – Iz > In
COP14 – I₂ < 1.45 x Iz
In = nominal current of protective device; I_B = design current; Iz = current capacity of cable ; I₂ = tripping/effective operation current of protective device.
COP16 – Requires determination of short circuit current within the installation. Effectively this requires every TNB district engineer to issue information on short circuit at the point of common coupling (PCC) at the locality of installation.
COP19 – Surge Protection Device (SPD) is RECOMMENDED for supply from overhead lines.
COP26 – Bending radius of 12 times diameter of cable is mandated. This effectively requires that elbows and junctions be used where cable changes direction.
In Malaysia, many wiring installation WILL FAIL THIS CRITERION.
COP27 – Space factor for conduit shall be 40% and for trunking shall be 45%.
COP28 – Cables installed behind walls (i.e. embedded in concrete) shall be horizontal or vertical parallel to the edges of the room and within 150mm from top and 150mm from edge of wall.
In Malaysia, many wiring installation WILL FAIL THIS CRITERION as cables are commonly installed diagonally fully and in many cases partially (picture 1).
COP30 – Wiring within ceiling space (under roof) must be provided with mechanical protection (i.e. installed within APPROVED conduit). In addition they must be installed either parallel or perpendicular to the edges of the wall.
COP31 – Water heater circuits shall have 2-pole switch installed at suitable location. At the vicinity of the heater a socket outlet is required (unswitched is acceptable).
COP32 – Air Conditioner circuits shall have socket outlet (unswitched type is accepable) at vinity of unit.
COP35 – Size of neutral conductor must be same size as phase conductor.
COP36 – Size of neutral conductor may be reduced (reference to COP35) at the discretion of the Professional Design Engineer (i.e. only a P.Eng can decide).
COP39 – Minimum cable size shall be 1.5mm² copper or 2.5mm² aluminum. Therefore the practice of using 1.25mm² copper cables is illegal!
Note: The use of aluminum cables WITHIN BUILDING is a FIRE HAZARD and should be carefully considered by the specifying engineer. India which has the most prevalent practice of using aluminum cables recommends that only cables above 50mm² may be aluminum.
COP41 – Allowable voltage drop is 4%. Voltage drop for motor starting may be 10%.
COP42 – Soldered connections to connect or terminate cables ARE NOT ALLOWED (see COP43 below).
COP43 – Connections of 2 lengths of conductors shall be by sockets and crimping.
COP44 – Cables for final sub circuit shall NOT BE JOINED.
COP51 – RCD (or current type ELCB) for single phase installation shall not exceed 100mA (the previous quoted in the regulations was 30mA).
COP52 – RCD for 3-phase installation shall not exceed 100mA. Three units of single pole type RCD instead of a 3-phase RCD may be used PROVIDED no 3-phase load(s) is/are served.
COP53 – Hand-held equipment shall have RCD not exceeding 30mA.
COP54 – RCD not exceeding 10mA shall be installed for special location (places of public entertainment; wet places; protection of electric water heaters).
COP56 – Requires RCD to be regularly tested, at least twice a year.
COP59 – It is recommended to place SPD before RCD (on the supply side), see figure 2.
COP61 – SPD should be rated not less than 5kA.
COP64 – The minimum earth connection from SPD to main earth terminal shall be not less than 10mm² copper and shall be as short as possible (0.5m).
COP65 – Every circuit shall be provided with means of isolation.
COP67 – Semiconducting devices shall not be used for isolation. Therefore a 'soft' switch must be backed up with a 'physcial' switch.
COP70 – Earth electrodes may be round copper sheathed steel rods, copper tapes of conductors, rods or pipes or steel bars of reinforced concrete foundations of buildings. The last option (rebars in foundation) is becoming a favourite option for many designers but however must be designed, specified and installed by experienced practitioners.
COP71 – Water or gas pipes ARE NOT allowed to be used as the sole means of earthing but equipotential bonding is permitted.
COP72 – Requires earthing system to be checked annually
COP73 – Earthing conductor buried in soil and without protection against corrosion shall be minimum 25mm² bare copper. This value may be reduced to 16mm² copper if protection against corrosion is present. Note: standard copper tape at 25mmx3mm complies with this requirement.
COP74 – Connection of earth conductors buried in ground using exothermic weld is recommended. Connections to earth electrodes which require periodic inspection at earth pit/chambers may be clamp type. Note: In the author's eperience many Malaysian contractor use braze joint which is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
COP76 – Protective conductor shall be (a) same size as line conductor if less than 16mm² (b) 16mm² if line conductor is more than 16mm² and up to 35mm² (c) half size of line conductor if more than 35mm².
COP77 – Protective bonding conductor to main earth terminal shall not be 6mm² for copper or 16mm² for aluminum.
COP78 – Neutral of standby system shall be separate when in operation.
COP79 – Overcurrent for essential services (e.g. fire fighting pumpsets) may be waived. Overcurrent protective devices if provided, may provide alarm only.
COP82 – Supervision of work on LV single phase installations shall be under direct responsibility of Wireman (single phase or 3-phase restriction). The Wireman shall certify completion under Form G.
COP83 - Supervision of work on LV 3-phase installations shall be under direct responsibility of Wireman (3-phase restriction). The Wireman shall be required to certify completion under Form G.
COP 84 – Testing for single phase installation shall be by Wireman (single-phase or 3-phase restriction) under Form H.
COP 85 – Testing for 3-phase installation shall be by Wireman (3-phase restriction) under Form H.
COP86 – Other installation at higher than low voltage shall be tested by a Electrical Services Engineer under Form H.
COP87 – Electricity SHALL NOT BE CONNECTED until Forms G & H are submitted by the owner or building operator.
COP88 – Insulation measurements shall be carried out on LV installation using dc voltages. Where 500Vdc is applied, the insulation resistance shall be more than 1MΩ.
COP91 – Every completed installation shall have as-built electrical diagrams prominently displayed. Diagrams shall be endorsed by the professional design electrical engineer.
Note: All P.Eng who are submitting officer under CCC should take note of Form H and G requirements under COP 82 to 85 and electricity connection under COP87.

Index – Are you Designing Fire Alarm System in Accordance with the Code?

2008-08-31T09:44:00.001-07:00

In this series of posts, I am republishing a paper I presented in a seminar held in K.L. on 22nd July 2004.
Fire detection and alarm as passive system is the most commonly prescribed system for fire protection. The types of system available ranges from the simplest one or two point manual alert system to the most complex detection, monitoring and alarm system with interlinks to central monitoring stations and building automation and security systems.

Under current procedures on 'Certification of Completion and Compliance' (CCC), the submitting person is obligated to design and (in the final 'act of CFO certification) installed in conformity to acceptanble codes and standards. It is therefore incumbent on the submitting professional that he be proficient in technical standards and codes on which he claims to have conform with.

This series is structured into the following parts:

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 6

2008-08-31T09:22:00.001-07:00

TRENDS and CONCLUSION

Trends in fire safety standards
The evolution of fire codes has seen steady and increasing sophistication in terms of practice and application. This trend is due to the increasing mass of information made available from research and forensic studies of failures and tragedies. Some trends which can be discerned can be listed as follows:

(a) Though prescriptive-based codes will still predominate in codes and standards, performance based codes will see increasing influence.

(b) Prescriptive codes will also be increasingly modified to include multiple scenario instead of simple scenario in the past. Prescriptive codes with a larger choice of scenario should not by confused with performance-based approach.

The reasons for this trend are:

(1) Harmonisation of codes (a growing international movement linked to globalisation trend) will force standards to be written on a generic basis with lee-way for multiple scenario to take into account deviations due to national conditions and practice).

(2) Increasing information and data available will enable a richer view of possible design scenarios.

(3) Increasing complexity of building projects demand more comprehensive solution.

(4) New considerations such as environmental concern and preservation of heritage are much more important issues than they use to be.

The trend above will however demand that the design or installation engineer responsible for fire safety have a higher standard of technical (and interpretation) ability. Simpler prescriptive codes of earlier times will now be more complex with higher number of parameters to contend with.

New MS1745 – Part 14 "Fire Detection and Alarm System" A working group under the supervision of Technical Committee on 'Dry Fire Protection System' is currently working towards a Malaysian Standards on Fire Detection and Alarm System. The WG has been working since 2006 and the full document be published (hopefully) in 2008. Perhaps I can get the chairman of the WG (Ir. Wong See Fong (mepengg@streamyx.com) to write a short blog on this standard in future.

Unresolved topics It can sometimes be asserted that increasing knowledge generate more question. This can be illustrated by ongoing debate over the efficacy of fire tests currently specified in cable standards, pitching cable manufacturers and standards organisation against each other (principally European-American). It is expected that specification of fire test for cables will see the most changes in the near future.

Concluding with a caveat on unfinished issues not included
As can be noted in this presentation, other issues (e.g. voice alarm system, types of detectors, type of controllers etc) pertaining to fire alarm system are not included in this presentation. The topics covered in this paper, by itself however, shows more complexity than the Consulting Engineer (in Malaysia) would be normally aware of. It is hoped that practitioners will take note that the science of Fire Safety as a multi-disciplinary engineering science warrants more attention than currently being allocated.

References

(1) NFPA70:2002 "National Electrical Code";

(2) NFPA72:2002 "National Fire Alarm Code";

(3) BS5839-1 : 2002

(4) "Fire Performance of Data Communication Cables" published by the Fluoropolymer Division, Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc, Washington DC (http:www.datacable.org).

(5) "Fire Testing of Electrical Cables for Public Transportation" Marcelo M. Hirschler, GBH International, California.

(6) "New Developments in Fire Safety Requirements for Communication Cables in North America and Europe" 2002, Draka USA (http://www.drakausa.com/)

(7) "Highlights of the New NFPA 72-2002" in 8 parts by Dean K. Wilson, P.E.

Go back to Index

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 5A

2008-08-31T08:30:00.000-07:00

Cable types, Fire Tests of Cables, and Installation Practice

This panel illustrates fire test discussed in the previous post.

Next Conclusion & Trends

(1) Abstract and Introduction

(2) Overview of BS5839-1 and NFPA72

(3) Circuit Design and Survivability

(4) Appendix B – Circuits By Class and Style NFPA 72-2002

(5) Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply

(6) Cable Types, Fire Tests of Cables and Installation Practice

(7) Fire Test -Figure2 3 t0 12

(8) Conclusion & Trends

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 5

2008-08-31T08:02:00.001-07:00

Cable types, Fire Tests of Cables, and Installation Practice

Fire resistance or enhanced cables receiving increase attention. Cables are the communication pathways between components of the fire alarm system and comprise the following class:

~~Low voltage cable system, typically power supply cables to control panels (110V, 1-phase or 240V, 1-phase or 415V, 3-phase)

~~Extra low voltage (ELV) cable system, typically for data, signalling or device power-line cables at less than 50Va.c. or 110Vd.c.

With the notion of linking issues of fire safety and circuit integrity or survivability, fire rating of cables are now receiving increasing attention from both codes. Both codes though not providing detail explanation of fire ratings, cross-referenced other codes which have relevance to fire rating of cables. Information on fire rating of cables and the specification of fire rated cables bear some difference in opinion between the European standards (which is also the IEC standards) and the North American ANSI/UL standards. This section will include an explanation of fire rating of cables which are not found within BS5839-1 and NFPA72 themselves.

BS5839-1; prescription for cables
The 2002 edition of BS5839-1 contains major upgrade to the 1988 edition by recommending fire resistant cables. Fire resistant cables are now extended to include two types (1) Enhanced and (2) Standard. The following recommendations are included as follows:

~~Clause 26 now specify that all cables must comply with existing requirements of BS6387, EN50200 PH30 (standard) or EN50200 PH120 (enhanced).

~~All system cables including LV mains supply to the panel to be fire resistant.

~~Standard fire resistant cables should be considered sufficient to meet the effects of fire with suitable jointing and support.

~~Enhanced cables are recommended in:

(1) Non-sprinkler buildings with more than four phases of evacuation.

(2) Non-sprinkler buildings of greater than 30 metres in height.

(3) Where the critical interlinking paths might be affected in unsprinklered linked buildings with occupancy requiring supervised evacuation or some difficulty in evacuation e.g. hospital.

Notes: In case (3) above, standard cables may be used if network loops provide the 'interlink' and such loops have start and return routed separately. In such case, the network loop is said to declassify the interlink as 'critical' .

(4) Where following risk assessment enhanced cables are deemed necessary.

~~Cable support system shall match the fire rating and performance of the cables. In practice this may require examination of plastic ties, trunking or clips which may act as critical components of the support system and which may not be suitably fire rated.

~~No external joints shall be used. Where junction boxes are not avoided, they shall be labelled "Fire Alarm" and match fire resistance rating of the cables.

~~Standard cables installed below 2m height require mechanical protection unless surface clipped to strong construction in relatively benign environments e.g. offices shops etc.

~~All conductors should have minimum cross sectional area of at least 1mm² and if stranded a minimum cross sectional area of 0.5mm².

~~Segregation of wirings:

(1) fire alarms should be segregated from other services in separate conduit or trunking.

(2) Where multicore cables are used none of the other cores should be used for other purposes.

(3) Mains cables should be segregated from system cables outside and inside the panel. They should not enter the panel at the same point.

~~Fire cables should be a single common colour throughout a building to aid identification, e.g. red. Figure 3 – Fire Rated Cables to BS5839-1 2002 .

Fire rating of cables in NFPA72 is cross referenced to NFPA70 (NEC)
In NFPA72 only two paragraphs described wiring requirements with a cross-reference to NFPA70 (National Electrical Code). This cross referencing however opens a wide topic related to cable types and fire performance rating based on North American (NFPA, UL and ANSI) standards. The following tabulation list Articles in NFPA70 (NEC) which are relevant.

Table 1 – Cable types and Fire Tests (North American)

Article 760 – Fire Protection Signalling System

	Applications	Fire Test
FPL	Power limited fire alarm cable for general purpose fire alarm use.	UL 1581 Vertical Tray Flame Test
FPLR	Power limited fire alarm riser cable for use in vertical riser shafts	UL 1666 Riser Flame Test
FPLRP	Power limited fire alarm plenum cable for use in ducts and air plenums	UL 910 Steiner Tunnel Test

Article 770 – Optical Fiber Cables and Raceways

OFNP OFCP	Non conductive and conductive optical fiber plenum cables suitable for use in ducts, plenums and other environmental air spaces.
OFNR OFCR	Non conductive and conductive optical fiber riser cables plenum suitable for use in vertical run in shaft or from floor to floor
OFNG OFCG	Non conductive and conductive optical fiber cables suitable for general purpose use except in vertical risers and plenums.
OFN OFC	Non conductive and conductive optical fiber cables suitable for general purpose use except in vertical risers, plenums and spaces used in environmental air.

Article 800 – Communications Cables and Raceways

CMP	Communication plenum cable listed as being suitable for use in ducts, plenums and other spaces for environmental air
CMR	Communication riser cable listed as being suitable for use in vertical run in shaft or from floor to floor
CMG	General purpose communication riser cable listed as being suitable for general purpose use except in vertical risers and plenums.
CM	Communication cable listed as being suitable for use suitable for general purpose use except in vertical risers and plenums.
CMX	Limited use communication cable suitable for use in dwellings and raceways
CMUC	Undercarpet communication cables suitable for undercarpet use

Note: CSA C22.2 No. 0.3M (Canadian Standard Association) defines resistance to the spread of fire is for the damage (char length) not to exceed 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in.) when performing the vertical flame test for cables in cable trays.

Details pertaining to segregation of cables similar to BS4839-1 (section 5.2) and measures for the mechanical protection of cables are included in NFPA70. Articles 760, 770 and 800 however contain more details pertaining to such installation measures compared to BS5839-1.

Fire Tests to European / British Standards

An understanding of fire tests on cables is essential before designers and installers can select the correct type of cables in compliance with the code. As British Codes and Standards are harmonising towards European Codes (EN), a description of the fire test for EN and BS can be taken to be similar. Table 2 describes the test listed under the hierarchy cables specified under BS5839-1.

Table 2 – List of Fire Tests under British Standards

BS6387:1994 CWZ

Fire Resistance, with and without water and mechanical shock; Specification for performance requirement for cables required to maintain circuit integrity under fire conditions:

Cat. C Exposed to Fire @ 950ºC. for 3 hours

Cat. W

(1) Expose to fire @ 650ºC for 15 mins., then

(2) Expose to fire @ 650ºC with water for 15mins.

Cat. Z

(1) Expose to fire @ 650ºC for 15mins., then

(2) expose to fire @ 650ºC. with mechanical shock for 15mins.

EN50200 BS5839-1:2002 Fire Performance Cable
Standard Grade BS5839-1:2002 - PH 30

PH30 (30 mins)

(1) Exposed to fire @ 830ºC. for 15mins., then

(2) exposed to fire @ 830ºC. with water & mechanical Shock for 15mins.

The temperature may vary +40 / - 0 deg. C

(Test No 2. is not detailed within EN50200 PH30 but is covered in BS5839-1:2002, Clause 26.2-D)

Enhanced Grade BS5839-1:2002 - PH 30

PH120 (2 hours)

(1) Exposed to fire @ 950ºC. for 60mins., then

(2) exposed to fire @ 950ºC. with water & mechanical Shock for 60mins.

The temperature may vary +40 / - 0 deg. C (Test No 2. is not detailed within EN50200PH120 but is covered in BS5839-1:2002, Clause 26.2-E)

BS7629-1 BS7629-1 E1 BS7629-1 E2

Specification for 300/500V Fire Resistant Electric Cables.; Having low emissions of smoke and corrosive gasses when effected by fire (Multi Core Cables)

BS4066-1-15.5, Cat. S

Fire Performance; Test on Electric Cables Under fire Conditions

BS7622 Cat.S Replaced By BSEN50268-2:2000 BSEN50268-1:2000

Smoke Emissions; Common test methods for cables under fire conditions, Measurement of smoke density of electric cables burning under defined conditions.

BS 6387 Tests by fire, water and mechanical shock. This test is used to determine capability of cables to maintain circuit integrity under fire conditions. Additional conditions of water and mechanical shock are applied for grading of capability of cables. Code used to designate capability of the cables are as follows:

Resistance to fire	Symbol
650ºC for 3 hours	A
750ºC for 3 hours	B
950ºC for 3 hours	C
950ºC for 20 minutes	D
Resistance to fire & water	Symbol
650ºC for 15mins. then for 15min with fire and water	W
Resistance to fire with mech. shock	Symbol
650ºC for 15mins. with 30 seconds hammer blow	X
750ºC for 15mins. with 30 seconds hammer blow	Y
850ºC for 15mins. with 30 seconds hammer blow	Z

Figure 4 – Fire Resistant Test; Figure 5 – Resistance to Fire and Water; Figure 6 – Resistance to Fire and Hammer Blows;

IEC 60331 Fire Tests This test is used to determine whether a cables can maintain circuit integrity during and after exposure to fire.

A sample of cable is exposed to fire for 3 hours at a temperature of between 750ºC and 800ºC while energised. After 3 hours the fire is extinguish and the circuit turned off. A duration of 12 hours is allowed before re-energising the cable and checking for circuit integrity.

IEC 60332-3 – Flame Propagation Tests
This test defines the ability of bunch cables to restrict flame propagation when laid in trunking, cable trays or conduit. The tests comprises 3 categories each determined by the amount of combustible material in a 1 m sample.

Category	A	B	C
Litres of combustible material in a 1 metre sample	7	3.5	1.5
Exposure to fire in minutes	40	40	20

The cable sample are placed vertically next to one another on a vertical tray where they are exposed to fire from a ribbon gas for the duration of exposure. After burning, the samples are wiped clean to examine for char on the surface of the cable. Charring should not reach a height exceeding 2.5m above the bottom edge of the burner. Figure 7 IEC 60332-3 Flame Propagation Test

IEC 61304 Smoke Density Test
This test measures the smoke emission from cables during a controlled fire. The test sample is burn in a chamber measuring 3m cubed The amount of smoke emission is measured by a light beam-photocell which measures the opacity of the smoke.
Figure 8 – Smoke Density Measurements

North American Standards on Fire Tests

The main fire tests recognised by the North Americas are the following:

UL VW1 – Single Cable Burner test

UL 1581 Vertical Tray Flame Test
UL 1666 Riser Flame Test
NFPA262, UL910 Steiner Tunnel Test

UP VW1 test on a single cable. This is the lowest grade test for assessing the fire resistant ability of a single cable. It is also similar to IEC 60332-1. It applies a flame (500W) to a single vertical cable sample and assess flame spread capacity (pass or fail criteria).

UL 1581 Vertical Tray Flame Test This test is similar to the IEC60332- part 3 test for group of cables (Figure 9 – UL 1581 Vertical Tray Flame Test (CM rating))

The flame load is a 30kW burner with the vertical samples free standing (compared to IEC60332-3 which is installed against a wall). Optional smoke density measurements may also be made.

UL 1666 Riser Flame Test
This test address the need to assess fire performance for cables grouped in risers. In UL1666, cables are mounted in a vertical tray arrangement within a 19ft high concrete shaft divided into two compartments at the 12 ft level and with 1ft by 2ft opening between compartments (to mimic a cable riser). The ignition source is a gas flame of 155kW which is left to burn for 30 minutes. Cables pass the test if no "flame" appear at the top of the bottom compartment during the test. Char length and smoke obscuration, mass loss or heat release may (or may not) be measured. Results are based on flame height Figure 10 – UL 1666 Riser Flame Test (CMR Rating)

150kW burner tested for 30 mins. for cables grouped on vertical tray in a riser shaft 19' high with bottom compartment 12' high. Criteria for passing test is the absence of flame at the bottom of top compartment during fire test.

NFPA262 or UL910 Steiner Tunnel Test
is most the stringent test for plenum cables. Test samples of cables grouped are loaded into a horizontal tunnel 25ft long by 1 ft wide (Steiner Tunnel). A gas flame of about 88kW is applied for 20 minutes under a 240 ft/min air flow rate. Flame spread distance along the cables (from flame origin) and smoke optical density at the exhaust duct of the tunnel are measured. Cables are certified acceptable when flame spread is less than 5ft from flame origin and optical smoke density do not exceed 0.5 peak and 0.15 average. Figure 11 – UL910 or NFPA262, Steiner Tunnel

Cables certified under 'Steiner Tunnel' test are said to be fire resistant with low smoke characteristics and are suitable for use in plenums (space where services pipes and ducts are routed e.g. space above false ceiling).

Hierarchy of Fire Tests

A hierarchy of fire test as illustrated in Figure 4 above shows the fire performance rating rank by fire test. Figure 12 – Hierarchy of Fire Performance Tests

Note: BRE/FRS refers to the "Building Research Establishment/ Fire Research Station" at Bedford, England who set up full scale or scaled test rigs.

Next --> Figures; of Fire Tests

(1) Abstract and Introduction
(2) Overview of BS5839-1 and NFPA72
(3) Circuit Design and Survivability
(4) Appendix B – Circuits By Class and Style NFPA 72-2002
(5) Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply
(6) Cable Types, Fire Tests of Cables and Installation Practice
(7) Fire Test -Figure2 3 t0 12
(8) Conclusion & Trends

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 4

2008-08-31T06:27:00.001-07:00

Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply

Principles of reliability of power supply and similarity between both codes. Power supply for fire protection systems under both codes contain similar principles of ensuring reliability of power supplies. Primary supply source which are unreliable should not affect the operation during normal operation and response during fire conditions. Both codes advocate the backing up of primary (or main source) power supply with a standby supply with or without generator back-up.

Power supply prescribed in BS5839-1 can be summarised as follows:

Primary power connection:

~~Cables/apparatus directly connected to a public or private distribution supply should be in accordance with IEE Wiring Regulations (BS7671).

~~ Connection to the mains supply should be via an isolating protective device (e.g. isolating switch-fuse) reserved solely for the purpose. Isolating device should be suitably labelled with warning (in red) and may be enclosed in secure box to prevent unauthorised access.

~~The design of the system should ensure that residual current devices (RCD) are not necessary. In cases where RCD is unavoidable, interruption of the general building supply in response to a fault should not result in interruption of the fire alarm supply.

~~Continuity of supply to fire alarm system should be ensured.

~~Switching off supply due to reasons of maintenance, emergency, energy savings etc should not affect power to (except in unoccupied premises with a simple manual system).

~~In distributed power supply system, failure or disconnection of the supply to any individual unit should be indicated at the main indicator panel as a fault. Any switch that can disconnect the power supplies to all or part of the system should be suitably labelled with warning and coloured red.

Types of power supply

~~Normal supply should be derived from the public supply system, transformed or modified Where no public supply system is available, privately generated power may be used.

~~Standby Supplies comprise secondary batteries or secondary batteries augmented with standby generators.

Maximum alarm loads is defined as the maximum load imposed by the alarm system under fire conditions. It include the power required to operate sounders, detectors, fault warning and illumination of monitoring devices and all ancillary services powered by the fire alarm system.

Standby Supply Generally standby supply are as follows:

~~Comprises of a rechargeable battery and automatic charger. The battery should have an expected life of 4 years. Car batteries are not to be used.

~~The batteries should be labelled with their date of installation. Battery should charge up from its final voltage in 24Hrs.

~~For category M and L systems the battery should be able to support the system for 24hrs and then sound the alarm for 30 mins. If a back up generator is used the battery should be able to support the system for 6hrs and then sound the alarm for 30 mins.

~~For category P the 24 hrs plus half an hour ring applies a) providing the building is 'supervised' (staff monitoring at 6 hours interval) or b) power failures are automatically notified to a remote station for response from supervisor.

~~For category P the battery should support the system for 24 hrs longer than the building is unoccupied up to 72 hrs whichever is the less, plus half an hour ringing whatever applies. If the building is ever unoccupied for longer than the standby battery time and there is facility for remote transmission then the power fault should be remotely transmitted.

Power supply in NFPA72
can be summarised in the following terms:

Power source:

~~Fire alarm system shall be provided with at least two independent source of power supplies; one primary and the other secondary (standby).

~~Exceptions to above; when the primary source is supplied by a dedicated branch circuit of an emergency supply system or a legally required or optional standby system.

Notes: NFPA70 or the 'National Electrical Code' (NEC); Articles 700 defines Emergency Supply System as essentially for emergency loads (load during emergency condition); Article 701 Legally Required Standby System is a subset of Article 700 system but restricted for legally required load (communications, legal utilities etc), and Article 702 defines Optional Standby System for loads which may contribute to life safety but are not within the purview of legally sanctioned standby loads.

Primary Supply

~~Primary supply shall have high degree of reliability and may be either i) a light & power service (i.e. normal mains supply), or ii) an engine-generator set provided such generator are fully supervised by trained operator.

~~Connections to 'light & power' service shall be from dedicated branch circuits. Circuit should be mechanically protected. Circuit disconnector should red-marked, prominently labelled and accessible only to authorised personnel.

~~Overcurrent protection devices to protect against short circuit in ungrounded conductor shall be provided.

Notes: Overcurrent protection against short circuit protection will normally perrtain to fine-protection class fuses (IEC standard). Depending on the location of the circuit and prospective short circuit current, Miniature Circuit Breaker (MCB) may not be capable of interrupting short circuits above 6kA. However, this condition principally relates to the North American centre-tap 110/220V system which may produce higher short circuit currents compared to the IEC defined TN-S system which would be the norm for final circuit for power outlets in Malaysia.

Secondary Supply The secondary supply shall automatically supply energy to the system within 30 seconds, without loss of signal, whenever the primary supply system fails.

The secondary supply system shall have sufficient capacity to operate:

24 hours the complete system under maximum quiescent conditions;
and then be capable of operating 15 minutes of full evacuation alarm operation at maximum connected load.

Secondary supply for emergency voice alarm communication system shall similarly operate 24 hours under quiescent conditions and shall be capable of operating the system for 2 hours during emergency conditions.

The secondary supply may consist of

storage battery system, or
standby generator system augmented with storage battery of 4 hours capacity (duration to power the fire alarm system).

Continuity of Power Supply
pertains to all cases of power transfer between primary and secondary source and can also be taken to cover power source connected from emergency or standby system. Continuity of supply must be maintained as follows:

~~power transfer must be automatic and generator must start up within 30 seconds;

~~standby batteries shall be maintain continuity of supply and to provide 15 mins. of power supply to the alarm system and to computer UPS forming part of the fire alarm system.

Next à Cable Types

(1) Abstract and Introduction

(2) Overview of BS5839-1 and NFPA72

(3) Circuit Design and Survivability

(4) Appendix B – Circuits By Class and Style NFPA 72-2002

(5) Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply

(6) Cable Types, Fire Tests of Cables and Installation Practice

(7) Fire Test -Figure2 3 t0 12

(8) Conclusion & Trends

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 3 Appendix B

2008-08-31T05:52:00.000-07:00

Appendix B -Circuit By Class and Style, NFPA 2002

Next go to ... Power Supply, Emergency Supply and Fail Safe Supply
(1) Abstract and Introduction
(2) Overview of BS5839-1 and NFPA72
(3) Circuit Design and Survivability
(4) Appendix B – Circuits By Class and Style NFPA 72-2002
(5) Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply
(6) Cable Types, Fire Tests of Cables and Installation Practice
(7) Fire Tests – Figures 3 to 12
(8) Conclusion & Trends

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 3?

2008-08-31T05:35:00.001-07:00

Circuit Design and Survivability
The integrity or survivability of fire alarm circuits.
As noted in the previous section, the need to maintain circuit integrity (BS5839-1) or circuit survivability (NFPA72) shares commonality in concept and ideas which are receiving increasing attention in both codes. The idea of circuit integrity or survivability arises from the understanding that fire can develop before it is registered by the detectors and/or alarm raised. The interval between the start of a fire and its putative detection may very well damage components of the alarm system thereby increasing the response time to its discovery and eventual intervention by fire officers. Such scenario is increasingly a possibility due to the complexity of buildings and its internal space planning.
Circuit integrity in BS5839-1 is defined in prescriptive terms which can be summarised as follows:
Circuits containing detectors
~A fault, or faults, in one zone cannot prevent the operation of the system in other zones of the building.
~A single fault should not remove protection from an area greater than that allowed for a single zone (which has a maximum area of 2,000m²).
~Two simultaneous faults should not remove protection from an area greater than 10,000 m².
~Removal of detectors or call point from the circuit should cause indication of fault signals for immediate intervention by officers.
~Detectors designed to be removable from their bases should not affect the operation of manual call points.
~Malicious removal may be considered by the inclusion of lockable device with special tools for removal of detectors.
~The system should be designed to minimise disruption during maintenance and testing. It is desirable that provision be made allowing individual detectors to be tested without the need to sound an alarm or to disable the particular circuit.
~Isolation of all detectors or call points in single zone system is permissible but facility retained for allowing activation of general alarm from the control panel.
~Provision for isolation of detectors or call points for maintenance or testing should be such as to allow the operation of alarm sounders in response to the operation of detectors or call points that have not been isolated.
Circuits containing fire alarm sounders
~If alarm sounders are connected to the same wiring as detectors, then no alarm sounder should be affected by the removal of any detector.
~Any sounder that is necessary in order to reach the recommended audibility levels (65dB or 5dB above ambient noise level or 75dB in case of premises with sleeping resident) should only be removable or electrically disconnected from the sounder circuit by the use of a special tool and the disconnection should generate a fault warning at the control and indicating equipment.
Devices which are connected in a ring (usually though not always for addressable systems)
~Provided that the devices can receive or send signals in either direction, they will continue to operate even with a single circuit or high series resistance in the ring. Such faults should be indicated at the control and indicating equipment within 60 min of their occurrence.
~Short circuit on simple ring circuit (which cannot offer protection against such fault), should be indicated, without giving a false alarm of fire, within 100 s.
~Where sounders are used in simple ring circuits, the distribution wiring to each sounder circuit should be protected against overload due to short circuit by a fuse or similar device.
~Short circuit isolating devices are recommended for protection against cable faults in ring systems, where such device will isolate short circuit to sections of the circuit without affecting the whole circuit.
In most case, implementing measures to comply with the above requirement involve physical configuration of hard wiring and/or hardware which have to be addressed during design stage. Some examples are as follows:
~~Physical segregation of circuits between zone.
~~All sounders to be physically hardwired separately from detector circuits.
~~In case of ring circuit (usually though not limited to addressable system circuited in a loop), the above two measures may have to be adopted (i.e. physical segregation of circuits) despite the ability of addressable circuits to accommodate individual devices in a loop.
~~Alternatively short circuit isolating devices (either inbuilt into initiating or notification devices or installed discretely onto segments of the ring) may be used to demarcate segment of the ring to comply with the above requirements.
~~In a ring circuit, the start and return leg of the loop are physically routed separately.
~~Physical configuration of control panel, devices and circuits allow for fault indication in case of short circuit and removal of devices from the circuit (similar to class A and B circuit under NFPA72 and illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 below).
Class and style of circuit in NFPA72 as defined carries similar notion of circuit integrity as in BS5839-1.
Class Circuits are designated class A or B depending on its capability to transmit alarm and trouble signals during non-simultaneous single circuit fault conditions:
~Class A circuits are capable of transmitting an alarm signal during a single open or a non-simultaneous single ground fault.
~Class B circuits are incapable of transmitting an alarm beyond the location of the fault conditions specified for class A.
Style for initiating devices, notification appliances and signalling line circuits describe requirements in addition to the requirements for Class A and B circuits. Styles are designated for the various circuits depending on its ability to meet alarm and trouble performance during a single open, single ground, wire-to-wire short and loss-of-carrier fault condition.
~Initiating device circuit shall be Style A, B, C, D or E (table 1 in Appendix B);
~Notification appliance circuit shall be Style W, X, Y or Z (table 2 in Appendix B).
~Signalling line circuit shall be Style 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 6 or 7 (table 3 in Appendix B).
Further conditions on circuits prescribed can be summarised as follows:
~All styles of Class A circuits (except wireless circuits) shall be installed with outgoing and incoming conductors physically routed separately.
~Exceptions to above (separation of incoming and outgoing) are when:
distance of loop do not exceed 10ft (3m);
vertically run conductors are enclosed in 2-hour rated cable assembly or enclosure;
~~ in looped conduit/raceway single drop to individual devices is permitted;
~~ in looped conduit/raceway single conduit or raceway drops or tap-outs to multiple devices within a single room not exceeding 1,000ft² (92.9m²) in area shall be permitted.
Tables in Appendix B illustrates implementation of circuit by style.

Next Appendix B
(1) Abstract and Introduction
(2) Overview of BS5839-1 and NFPA72
(3) Circuit Design and Survivability
(4) Appendix B – Circuits By Class and Style NFPA 72-2002
(5) Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply
(6) Cable Types, Fire Tests of Cables and Installation Practice
(7) Fire Test -Figure2 3 t0 12
(8) Conclusion & Trends

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 2?

2008-08-31T04:14:00.001-07:00

BS5839–1 and NFPA72 – A Overview

Scope of BS 5839-1 and NFPA 72
In ensuring that reasonable care and due diligence have been taken in the design of fire detection and alarm system, compliance to technical standards is a key test. Two standards of which Malaysian engineers are most familiar are BS5839 and NFPA 72.

BS5839 "Fire Detection and Alarm Systems for Building" comprise 8 parts. British Standards (similar to ISO standards) are structured into parts with each part containing particular aspect of the standard or code. Each part is self-contained within its own right and as can be seen from a listing of all parts of BS5839, Part 1 "code of practice for system design, installation, commissioning and maintenance" will be the code consulted by design engineers.

* Part 1-:-2002 – Code of practice for system design, installation, commissioning and maintenance.

* Part 2-:-1983 – Specification for manual call points (withdrawn and replaced by BS EN54-11:2002)

* Part 3-:-1988 – Specification for automatic release mechanisms for certain fire protection equipment

* Part 4-:-1988 – Specification for control and indicating equipment (withdrawn and replaced by BS EN54-2 'Control and indicating equipment' and BS EN54-4 'Power supply equipment').

* Part 5-:-1988 – Specification for optical beam smoke detectors.

* Part 6-:-1995 – Code of practice for the design and installation of fire detection and alarm systems in dwellings.

* Part 8-:-1998 – Code of practice for the design, installation and servicing of voice alarm system.

* Part 9-:-2003 – Code of practice for the design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of emergency voice communication systems.

NFPA 72 "National Fire Alarm Code" published by the National Fire Protection Association of North America, in contrast to BS5839 is published as one self-contained book (as is the normal structure of NFPA standards). NFPA72 is styled as a manual but worded as a legal document. It is organised into chapters with 'Articles' within each chapter. The 2002 edition reorganised the chapters of the previous (1999) edition as follows:

* Chapter 1 – Scope and purpose;

* Chapter-2-–-Referenced publications (previously chapter 9);

* Chapter-3 – Definitions (previously contained in chapter 1);

* Chapter-4-– Fundamentals of Fire Alarm Systems (previously contained in chapter 1);

* Chapter-5-– Initiating devices (previously chapter 2);

* Chapter-6-– Protected premises fire alarm systems (previously chapter 3);

* Chapter-7-– Notification appliances for fire alarm systems (previously chapter 4);

* Chapter-8-– Supervising station fire alarm systems (previously chapter 5);

* Chapter-9-– Public Fire Alarm Reporting Systems (previously chapter 6);

* Chapter-10-– Inspection, testing, and maintenance (previously chapter 7);

* Chapter-11-– Single- and multiple-station alarms and household fire alarm systems (previously titled 'Fire warning equipment for dwelling units in chapter 8).

* Annexes (previously called Appendixes) are described as 'not part of the code' but provided for information purposes only. Three annexes are included as follows:

~ Annex A – Explanatory Materials (this annex contains much of the material pertaining to detail interpretation on locating/spacing of detectors, circuiting of devices based on class and style etc);

~ Annex B – Engineering Guide for automatic fire detector spacing (provides a 'performance-basis' for the location and spacing of heat detectors with formulas and data on heat release rate for common building materials included).

~Annex C – Referenced publications.

Types of Alarm System Detection and alarm system prescribed ranges from the simplest one or two point manual alert system to the most complex detection, monitoring and alarm system with interlinks to central monitoring stations, building automation and security systems. An understanding of the type of system possible or prescribed in BS5829 and NFPA72 is essential before an in-depth description on wiring practice and power supplies can proceed.

BS5839-1 approaches system design by defining fire protection needs based on categories of protection as follows:

*Type P – Protection of Properties

P1 – All areas covered with detectors except voids less than 800mm in height

P2 – Defined areas in a building having a high fire risk.

*Type L – Protection of Life

L1 – Same as P1

L2 - Same as P2 but for areas with high fire risk to life

L3 – Protection of escape routes

L4 – Protection of circulation areas (2002 edition)

L5 – Fire engineered solution to meet criteria of fire safety & protection of properties (2002 edition).

*Type M – Manual System

*Suffix X – System with multi-occupancy use.

BS5839-1 do not specify the type of system to be used but prescribes consultation with interested parties such as the authorities, property owner, insurance company and others. Factors which may determined the choice of system type include consideration for life and business risk, legal requirements, insurers requirements, maintainability etc. Appendix A (extracted from Annex A of Standard illustrate range of current custom and practice.

NFPA72 do not specify the type of system to be used (manual or automatic detection and at which location etc) but merely specifies the performance criteria, design features, installation method and maintenance procedure for fire alarm system. NFPA 72 recognises that consideration for active and/or passive fire protection system should be integrated as a 'life safety plan' which take into account other aspect of fire safety such as prevention, egress, protection and particular aspects of occupancy. NFPA 101 'Life Safety Code' contains detail prescriptions on the type of systems recommended for the various types of occupancies. In keeping with the 'manual style' format of NFPA72; fire alarm systems are classified as:
* Household fire warning systems;

* Protected premises for fire alarm systems (this class of fire alarm include most systems designed for apartments, offices, industrial buildings etc.);

* Supervising station for fire alarm system (this include specification for communications between alarm system and supervisory station which may be local, remote or municipal master fire alarm panel).

A Comparison of BS5839 and NFPA72 shows the major difference or similarity in style and content of both codes:
Structure of Code BS5839 is structured into parts each of which self-contained within its own rights. NFPA72 is written in a comprehensive manner with chapters containing all aspect of fire alarm system.

Revision Cycle Editions for both codes showing revision cycles are as follows:
~ BS5839-1 1980, 1984, 1988 and 2002
~ NFPA72 1990, 1993, 1996, 1999, 2002

Scope Both BS5839 and NFPA do not specify the type of system for the various types of occupancies or premise. BS5839 recommends consultation with interested parties (authorities, owner, insurer etc) whilst NFPA72 specifically refers to NFPA101 'Life Safety Code' for prescription on the type of systems to be installed for various occupancies. Thus both codes limit themselves purely to a specification on the design features, installation aspect and maintenance procedures for fire alarm system,

Coverage Due to the structure of BS5839, part 1 by itself however do not contain detail specifications for components of fire alarm system (such as detectors, manual call points etc.), voice alarm, emergency voice communication system and small alarm system in dwellings as they are covered in other parts of BS5839. or other BS (BS EN54). NFPA72 in comparison include all scope not included in BS5839-1 (refer section 2.1 above). BS5839 taken as a whole (i.e. including all parts) however can be said to be similar in scope and coverage of NFPA72.

Language Style BS5839 is written generally in the format of a 'guide' with 'recommendations' setting out performance requirements whilst NFPA72 is written in the style of a manual. The manual style of NFPA72 contains detail installation and design guide whilst BS5839 is a little sketchy on details.

Details BS5839 has less details on installation and design issues keeping instead to setting broad criteria of design whilst NFPA72 is full of details pertaining to design and installation, example:
~ BS5839-1 recommendations on circuit "survivability" are brief clauses such as "a fault on one zone shall not prevent the operation of the system in other zones..." or "A single fault shall not remove protection from an area greater than that allowed under 7.2(a) ..." etc. Designers and installers of alarm system are presumably left to decide on system hardware and wiring to comply with the above.
~ In comparison NFPA72 defines circuit "survivability" in terms of circuit class and/or style. The class and style designation contain details which specifically prescribe how hardware and circuits should be configured .

Fire Zones
Both BS5839-1 and NFPA72 contain similar concepts of fire zone with minor differences mainly on the system of units. Maximum area for one fire zone is specified as 2,000m² for BS5839-1 and 20,000ft² (or 1,860m²) for NFPA 72.

Classification of System Types BS5839 classifies system types based on fire protection needs; type P for protection of properties, type L for protection of life and type M for manual system. In BS5839-1, the types of system determines system configuration (detectors coverage, manual call points etc). NFPA72 do not have such a classification concept similar to BS5839-1 but instead rely on NFPA101 to determine fire needs for system configuration. Section 2.2 has details of system types.

Spacing of initiating devices The location and spacing of initiating devices (heat/smoke detectors) is prescribed as follows:

~BS5839-1 is specific on spacing as follows:

smoke detectors under flat ceiling – 7.5m

heat detectors under flat ceiling – 5.3m

in corridor under 2m wide detector spacing may be 15m (smoke) and 10.6 (heat);

detector density may be generally calculated at 100m² (smoke) and 50m² (heat);

On pitched roofs with detectors at or near the apex distances increase by 1% for each degree of slope to a maximum of 25%.

manual call points are recommended at 30m travel distance.

~NFPA72 has a performance oriented approach with regards to detectors spacing:

No exact figures are prescribed but detector spacing should be based on 'listed' spacing.

A figure of 30 ft (9.1m) is quoted as a guide for spot type smoke detectors but with caveat on complying with manufacturer's instructions.

Correction factors to 'theoretical' spacing (i.e. listed or manufacturer's recommendations), include consideration for pitch roof, ceiling heights, corridors etc. which are listed in great details (especially in Annex A).

Location of additional manual call points are recommended at 200ft (61m) travel distance (compare with BS5839-1 prescription of 30m).

Listed is defined in NFPA "included in a list published by an organisation that is acceptable to the authorities having jurisdiction and concerned with evaluation of products or services ...". Examples of a listing organisation is "UL".
Circuit Design again illustrate the difference between the depth of details contained in BS5839-1 and NFPA72.
~BS5839-1 contains general recommendations for "circuit integrity" which are performance oriented in aspect.
~NFPA in contrast though also containing requirements for "circuit survivability" similar in nature to BS5839-1 include detail classification of circuit 'class' and 'style'.
Power supply Both codes similarly prescribed secondary or standby supplies using batteries with or without generator backup. Differences relates to interpretation of 'operational time' (which is the operation time required after basic 24 hours quiescent operational capacity):
~Under BS5839-1, operation time is generally interpreted as 30 minutes of maximum alarm loads (i.e. all sounders ringing) during fire conditions;
~NFPA72 defines operation time as 15 minutes of maximum load during fire conditions (i.e. with sounders ringing).
Cables and Wiring Requirement Both codes similarly prescribed fire rated or 'enhanced' cables with differences in defining performance ratings for 'enhanced' or fire rated cables. The definition of fire-rating between the British (and by extension European and IEC) standards and the NFPA (north American and ANSI) standards has differences which will be described in greater details in section 5.

~ The 2002 edition of BS5839-1 contain major enhancement to the recommendations on use of 'standard', 'fire-rated' and enhanced cables. Other BS codes are referenced in defining standard tests for enhanced or standard cables.

~ NFPA72 contain only a brief reference to cabling requirement. The brief referral however point to NFPA70 ('National Electrical Code') Articles 760, 770 and 800.

Other Major Differences or Similarities between the two codes include the following:

~ The 2002 edition of BS5836 include major enhancement with new subjects some of which are not included in NFPA72:

A new section address issues of false alarm by defining false alarm and steps to mitigate such false alarms (no equivalent in NFPA72).

Additions to section 6 (maintenance) champions the concept of continuous monitoring of system functions (a useful concept where legislative measures for re-certification or regular certification of premise is to be enforced) (no equivalent in NFPA72).

Performance based design is given due recognition with addition of new system type L5 ('engineered solution'). A new BS document PD 7974-4 "Fire safety engineering principles in building; part 4 – detection of fire and activation of fire protection system" (2003) contains guidance on development, design and application of performance based solutions for fire alarm system. (NFPA72 already contain substantial information on this subject as annex).

~ NFPA72, since the 1999 edition include substantial information material for designing to 'performance-based' criteria.

Next àCircuit Design & Survivability

1) Abstract and Introduction

(2) Overview of BS5839-1 and NFPA72

(3) Circuit Design and Survivability

(4) Appendix B – Circuits By Class and Style NFPA 72-2002

(5) Power Supply, Emergency Supply, Fail Safe Supply

(6) Cable Types, Fire Tests of Cables and Installation Practice

(7) Fire Tests – Figures 3 to 12

(8) Conclusion & Trends

Are You Designing Fire Alarm System In Accordance with the Code – 1

2008-08-31T02:30:00.001-07:00

ABSTRACT

This paper was presented at a Seminar on Fire Alarm and Detection System organised by The Institution of Engineeers Malaysia (IEM) and The Malaysian Fire Protection Asscoiation (MFPA) in Kuala Lumpur on the 22nd July 2004.

Fire detection and alarm as passive system is the most commonly prescribed system for fire protection. The types of system available ranges from the simplest one or two point manual alert system to the most complex detection, monitoring and alarm system with interlinks to central monitoring stations and building automation and security systems. This paper focuses on wiring practice and power supplies for fire detection and alarm system. The subject is presented as a comparative analysis of BS5839-1 and NFPA72 and include the following topics (1) Introduction ('proficiency and the law', 'current state of industry practice'); (2) A quick overview of BS5839 and NFPA72; (3) Circuit design and survivability; (4) Power supply, emergency supply, fail-safe supply; (5) Cable types, fire tests of cables and installation practice; and (6) Trends

INTRODUCTION

Statutory and civil liabilities require professionals to have proficiency in technical standards. Fire Protection is an important component in the design of building systems. In Malaysia, the requirement for fire protection is made mandatory under the provision of the following Acts:

~The 'Fire Services Act'; Act 341, 1988' and 'Fire Certificate Regulations, 2001'; and

~'The Streets, Drainage and Building Act'; (Act 133, 1974) and the 'Uniform Building By-Law (1984)' (UBBL).

Under the provision of the above Acts, Regulations and By-Laws, professional engineers and architects are the principals responsible for the implementation of fire protection systems in new buildings. This responsibility (though conferring privilege on the professional) carries liabilities which is both statutory and civil in nature.

The right to submit engineering or architectural plans granted by the law is a privilege which can be said to be economically exclusive in nature. Liabilities concomitant to such privilege are (1) Statutory and (2) Civil. Statutory liabilities pertain to responsibilities arising from 'The Engineers /Architects Acts', The UBBL, and The Fire Services Act. Civil liabilities stem from 'The Civil Law Act' which requires that persons practicing a vocation as a professional owes a duty of care to the public. In the first case, the government can punish the offender by deregistration and/or fine whilst in the second case, the public can sue the offender for negligence and damages.

Currently under 'Certificate of Completion and Compliance' (CCC) procedures, the submission of engineering plans for fire protection systems requires a statutory declaration by the professional attesting that the systems are designed to and (in the final 'act' of C.F. certification) installed in conformity with accepted technical standards. Proficiency in technical standards is therefore very important expertise required of the building services engineer.

Current state of the fire protection Industry is less than satisfactory
Without denigrating the profession (and apologies to professionals who are steadfast in their commitment to high standards of technical expertise and professionalism), it is the personal opinion of the author that current standards of practice in the fire protection industry (in Malaysia) is less than satisfactory:

àFire protection system as an engineering science do not attract as much attention as other engineered systems such as ACMV and Electrical. This result in less attention spent on design, specifying, updating knowledge and attending CPD on fire protection.

àKnowledge of and proficiency in technical standards of fire protection systems is inadequate or outdated even amongst practicing professionals. This is especially evocative given the relative lack of CPD courses on technical standards and design issues on fire protection compared with other engineering sciences such as electrical engineering and ACMV. A quick survey of current design practice find wide gaps between actual practice and practice prescribed in international standards.

Gaps between actual design practice and technical standards; anecdotal survey by the author in his capacity as Project Management Consultant overseeing works by more than 25 different consultants for small and large projects (from RM10 million to RM600million) in the period from 1999 to 2004. This is especially pertinent given that the submitting professional has to declare that systems submitted are designed to specified technical standards (BS, NFPA or AS).

àCurrent industry practice (at least among the consulting engineering industry) of delegating fire protection systems to mechanical engineers or mechanical engineering departments constitute a 'sidelining' of the issues and practice of the science of fire protection. In truth, fire protection is a multi-disciplinary science which requires knowledge of architecture, space planning, building materials, hydraulics, electricity and even I.CT. Fire protection as an engineering science deserves recognition as a specialised expertise within its own rights.

The issues listed above have taken on particular urgency, given current trends in the building industry:

àImplementation of 'self-certification' procedures under CCC demand that cogent steps be taken to address issues related to proficiency and awareness of technical standards.

àGlobalisation and the pursuit of 'Mutual Recognition Agreement' (MRA) will promote the cross border movements of professionals and engineering contractors. Malaysian professionals in this context will therefore need to constantly maintain and upgrade their standards of expertise to face the challenges of globalisation.

MRA are agreements harmonising recognition of professional accreditation programme and technical standards between nations. At a regional level (ASEAN), Malaysia (led by the Board of Engineers Malaysia) is spearheading the promotion of engineering and architectural MRA within ASEAN. Works currently conducted by the sub committee on MRA (current up to July-2004) include a study of all laws and regulations prescribing technical standards and/or pertaining to regulation of general and specific sector of the registered professionals in Malaysia, with the objectives of streamlining such prescription in preparation for MRA.

àThe growing stature of the international standardisation movements (a sub-agenda of globalisation) is an important trend which demand the attention of professionals. This include the withdrawal of British Standards (which is currently the norm in Malaysia) and the adoption of EN (European) and International Standards (ISO) at the international level. Malaysian engineers are therefore required to re-educate themselves on current international practice on fire protection. This trend is similar for the community of civil and structural engineers in Malaysia, who are now required to relearn decades of practice (using British Standards and CP Codes) due to the scheduled withdrawal of British Codes on concrete and structures (sometime around 2008) in favour of European Codes.

àThe ever increasing complexity and size of building projects are having impact on the design of engineering systems. Current trends within this thread include integration of fire protection systems with building systems, the increasing importance of automation and total solution in building systems and the movements towards performance based standards.

Performance based standards Current trends in technical standards are now evolving towards a more performance based approach or at least allocating larger significance or recognition to ‘Performance-Based’ standards. This can be seen in the latest editions of BS5839-1 (2002), EN54 (2002) and NFPA72 (2002).

The theme of this paper. In keeping with the theme of this seminar which focuses on fire detection and alarm systems and with the issues described in preceding as background, this paper will attempt to present a summary of international practice on wiring standards pertaining to design and installation of fire alarm system. The presentation is structured around a comparative analysis of BS5839 and NFPA72.

By a presentation of information in this paper, it is hoped that Malaysian professionals in the fire protection industry will be able to measure the gaps between actual design practice and international standards on wiring practice for fire alarm system.

Next à Quick Overview of BS 5839-1 and NFPA72

Energy Efficiency – 2 Statutory Framework

2008-08-22T04:22:00.001-07:00

E.E. Subject to Market Forces

In Malaysia, as energy is "relatively" cheap and due to her liberal economy, E.E. measures are subject to market forces. Due to these factors many a zealous salesman trying to market E.E. measures and gadget from the 1980s up to the 1990s, were NOT very successful. Purveyors of E.E. systems and gadgets (in the author's experience) of which many were from Singapore (due to the island republic's experience on E.E.), in the author's opinion, suffers from a lack of sufficient understanding of the E.E. market in Malaysia and additional burden of hubris of "technologity superiority". In the late 1990s up to present, with the subsiding of "Thatcheronomics/Mahathironomics" (note 1), and following the establishment of the Energy Commission under the 'Energy Commission Act' (2001) many ESCOs (energy services company) were set up providing services in energy consulting, training, management etc. However to date (2008), ESCOs who depend solely on energy as their core business do not seem to be surviving successfully and ESCOs who DO NOT depend on energy as a core business will be able to survive, e.g. (modestly) the undersigned website still raw and ..... I can't advertise for them just go to their website àhere.

Note 1: I would aver that economic opportunist who claimed to be proponents of 'moneterist' and 'neoliberal' ideologies are still fighting a VERY ACTIVE rear guard action for the rich pickings from 'privatisation' in Malaysia.

In the absence of (statutory) punitive or incentive measures, E.E. measures, when subjected to market forces will have to survive on the merit of financial "RoI" (Return on Investment).

However despite market forces, E.E. measures which can work, are practical for local conditions and at least do not have very high capital cost may still be considered by the Malaysian public for implementation; examples of some successful measures commonly adopted in Malaysia are (without the need for legislative incentive and punishment):

1. Introduction of solar heater hot water application since the late 1970s. Solar heaters are common gadgets on many Malaysian residential roof tops. Link1, Link2, Link3. Research on solar heating for drying in the food processing industry has been an ongoing reserach at Malaysian Universities since the 1960s.

2. Waste heat recovery from standard air cooled condensers of air conditioning units are commonly used to recycle waste (low grade) heat from air conditioners, usually to supplment electric heater for hot water application. Developed since early 1980s, this home-grown technology is considered 'matured' and is commonly used (by experienced design engineers) for bangalows, restaurant and even hotels. Visit this company for details àpecol.

3. The use of key-card system for hotel rooms (since the 1980s is now standard design practice). The early 'limit' switch key pocket system (which use to suffer from high failure rate due to rough handling by house staff) are now currently more sophisticated with the use of magnetic- switch, optoelectric-switch and smart card system.

4. The replacement of incandescent lamps with energy saving lamps, replacement of light box diffusers with more efficient reflectors were measures which became popular from the mid 1980s. This is in fact a clear case of E.E. measures which DO NOT 'survive' on merit of "RoI", being popularly adopted from the mid 1980s (though it was not overly capital-intensive).

5. Malaysian is a world leader in plantation management and technology and as far back as the 1980s, mini 'cogeneration plant' burning waste biomass and generating steam (for process) and electricity was a norm in many mills of large plantations (these were some of the real-world experience where I cut my teeth designing for the Guthrie plantation group as a consultant).

Statutory Framework – A Brief Historical Overview

A historical timeline of energy regulations in Malaysia can be summarised as follows:

Early years Under British Colonial government, electricity generation and distribution were undertaken by municipal authorities and private licensees. It can be said that the early years of electricity generation was actually more liberal with companiies such as"The Perak River Hydro Co.", "Kinta Electrical Distribution Co." snd "Penang Municipal Electrical Dept".

1949 Electricity Ordinance the 'Central Electricity Board' (CEB) was established to regulate the industry by issuing licenses and regulating the various municipal and private utilities.During the first decade after Merdeka, the CEB apart from issuing licenses and accrediting competent persons (testers, chargeman, wireman), was also responsible for developing the nascent national grid. A major agenda of the CEB was 'Malaysianisation'.

1962 – 'Sarawak Electricity Supply Corporation Ordinance'. The Sarawak Electricity Co. Ltd. was corporatised as the 'Sarawak Electricity Supply Corp. (SESCO).

1963 Sabah The North Borneo Electricity Board was renamed the Sabah Electricity Board.

1965 National Electricity Board (NEB) or Lembaga Letrik Negara (LLN) aving sucessfully 'Malaysianised' the electricity industry, the CEB was renamed the NEB or LLN to reflect national aspirations. The NEB/LLN embarked on estalishing a national grid and developing electricity infrastructure for the next 15 years. By this time production of oil off MIRI Sarawak was slowly ramping up. Oil production was usually parcelled to foreign concessionaires.

The 1973 Oil Crisis was a shock to world economies arising out of the Isreali-/Arab war (Yom Kippur/ Ramadan war of 1973)

1974 'Petroleum Development Act' (download hereàsite) All national assets of petroleum is vested in PETRONAS. Instead of concessionary agreement on oil production, PETRONAS instituted 'production sharing agreement'. Together with the 'Petroleum Regulations (1974)' Petronas as a wholly owned Government company, has sole rights to all exploration and production in the upstream sector. The'Regulations' also vest in Petronas the power to regulate the downstream end of the industry.

1975 First export of crude oil by Petronas.

1976 Production Sharing Agreement
Petronas concluded the first production sharing agreement with ESSO and Shell.

1980 National Depletion Policy was established to address the issue of diminishing oil resources by limiting the production of oil for large fields.

1981 – 4 fuel strategy By the early '80s, Malaysia was heavily dependent on oil for electricity generation. The four-fuel strategy was established to diversy fuel mix in national energy-usage. Natural gas, the rising star, provided the main impetus for the 4th fuel.

1983 – Sabah Electricty Act established the Lembaga Letrik Sabah (Sabah Electricity Board) to regulate the electricity industry in Sabah. The first shipment of LNG from Bintulu, Sarawak destined for Japan was inaugrated.

1984 Phase 1 of PGU (Peninsular Gas Utilisation) project covering about 32km in the east centered around the Kertih Gas Processing Plant (GPP) was completed by Petronas.

1987 – 'Electrical Inspectorate Act' Up to this stage, the electricity utility (NEB/LLN) was also acting as the regulator. The 'Electrical Inspectorate Act' provide for separation of the regulator from the utility operator with the establishment of the Chief Electrical Inspectorate (CEI) who is the forerunner of the Energy Commission (Suruhanjaya Tenaga).

1990 'Electricity Supply Act 1990' (download here àktak) marked the first step towards 'liberalisation of the electricity market'. The Act allows for the licensing of private generators and the establishment of Independent Power Producers (IPPs). In line with the Act, the NEB/LLN was corporatised as Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB). The Chief Electrical Inspectorate is now reorganised as the Electricity Supply Department (or Jabatan Bekalan Elektrik - JBE).

1992 Phase 2 of PGU (Peninsular Gas Utilisation) comprising 3 GPPs and 714km of trans-peninsular pipeline connecting to West Malaysia, Johore and Singapore was completed.

1993 – Gas Supply Act 1993 (refer here àEnergy Commission) allows for the regulation of the retail end of the gas supply industry. The 'Gas Supply Department' is combined with the 'Electricity Supply Department' to form the 'Electricity & Gas Supply Department' (Jabatan Bekalan Elektrik & Gas or JBEG). JBE has now morphed into JBEG).

1994 – 'Electricity Supply Regulations' (refer here àEnergy Commission) was gazetted for regulating public safety.

1997 – 'Gas Supply Regulations' (refer here àEnergy Commission) was gazetted to regulate the retail sector of Gas supply. The upstream end of gas production and transmission under PGU still remains under the jurisdiction of the 'Petroleum Development Act'.

1998 – Sabah, PTM and PGUIII was a busy year for the energy sector with the following major events:

1. Sabah Electricity Board was privatised with the establishement of 'Sabah Electricity Sdn Bhd'.

2. The Ministry of Energy, Communication & Multimedia established Pusat Tenaga Malaysia (PTM)

3. Phase 3 of PGU reached the Thai border along the West Coast with the construction of 450km of pipeline and 2 new GPPs.

2000 – CETREE or "Centre for Education and Training in Renewable and Energy Efficiency" was establised with the support of DANIDA (the Danish International Development Agency, under the Danish Ministry of foreign affairs) and the Ministry of Energy, Communication & Multimedia is based at Universiti Sains Malaysia (Penang).

2001 – Energy Sector Activities Intensify This year 2001 saw a flurry of activities in the energy sector"

1. The Energy Commission was established with the enactment of the 'Energy Commission Act'. This Act include 'Energy Efficiency' as an agenda under the jurisdiction of the EC or Suruhanjaya Tenaga.

2. The MS1525 "Code of Practice on Energy Efficiency and Use of Renewabe Energy For Non-Residential Buildings' was published by SIRIM. As this document is copyright please contact SIRIM and pay for a copy.

3. The 5th fuel policy was announced by the Ministry of Energy, Communication & Multimedia. A target 5% of biomass in fuel mix for electricity generation was put forward (refer to 4 fuel policy). The SREP programme and biomass programme was immediately launched sometime this year.

2002 – BIOGEN The Biomass Power Generation and Co-Generation project jointly funded by UNDP-GEF and the Ministry of Energy, Water & Communications, Malaysia (MEWCM) was launched in line with the 5-fuel strategy. PORIM (with their ownership of database on biomass in Malaysia) signed the first development agreement with the BIOGEN group.

2004 – LEO Building The MEWCM moved into their Low Energy Office Building located in Putrajaya in September of this year.

2005 – Privatisation of SESCO the Sarawak Electrictiy Supply Corporation was fully privatised as Syarikat SESCO Berhad.

2005 – MBIPV The Malaysia Building Integrated Photo Voltaic programme cofunded by UNDP-GEF and the Ministry of Energy, Water & Communications, Malaysia was launched.

2006 – National Biofuel Policy Concurrent with the trend of biofuel worldwide and the activities on biodiesel plant in Malaysia, the Government launched this policy around March of this year.

2007 – ZEO Building Pusat Tenaga Malaysia (Malaysia Energy Centre) moved into their Zero Energy Office Building this year.

1st decade of the new millenium (from 2000 to present)

The early years of the decade saw much promise for the energy industry in Malaysia:

1. The agenda for liberalising the energy markets was still very much on the table. The experience of Singapore has shown in the way and it was expected that Malaysia, having 'deregulated' the generation-end of the electricity market, will follow by opening up the retail-end of the electricity market to competition. In particular with the completion of the peninsular-wide gas pipeline (PGU) and power link-up with Singapore and Thailand, there was much expectation that a regional energy exchange (hopefully based in Malaysia) for the ASEAN region will emerge.

2. Legislation was put into place to address the issue of energy efficiency as a national strategy. This include revision to the 'Electricity Act' to allow for regulatory oversight over 'electricity efficiency' in 2001. The 'Energy Commission Act' was also enacted towards this end. During the early half of the decade, much debate on a proposal to gazette regulations for mandatory requirement of energy audits and energy managers was carried out.

3. Renewable energy and in particular biomass enjoy strong government support and funding including assistance programme from DANIDA and UNDP. The Small Renewable Energy Programme (SREP) was launched with much fanfare and very quickly a number of 'mega' projects were announced particularly with PORIM.

4. The Energy Commission with the support of DANIDA convened two advisory boards (Building and Industry) made up of industry stake holders to advise the EC on energy efficiency. Work groups was quickly convened on the following:

(a) Energy labelling workgroup for common consumer product ("star labelling"). This workgroup culminated in a proposal for implementing energy-labels for fridges under the legal framework of the 'Electricity Act'.

(b) High Efficiency Motor (HEM) workgroup. More information on HEM can be obtained in this file à ('understanding EE motors') and here à 'seminar on HEM' (caution 2.7MB).

(c) Workgroup on energy efficiency in building (of which members from JKR were a majority). The context for this workgroup can be found here à 'EE in Building'.

(d) Working on the experience of the LEO Building and with funding from DANIDA, JKR initiated a workgroup which culminated in the publication of a document (which will hopefully serve as the bench mark and design criteria for government buildings) titled: "Design Strategies for Energy Efficiency in New Buildings (Non-Domestic)' (sorry no downloads due to copyright. Contact JKR for a copy.)

5. JETRO (Japan External Trade Organisation) and the Energy Conservation Center of Japan (ECCJ) became involved in the energy forum around 2006 (up to this date DANIDA seems to be monopolising the energy agenda in Malaysia) by convening workgroup with the Ministry of Energy and Pusat Tenaga Malaysia. The workgroups comprising industry stakeholders (IEM, ACEM, MASHRAE, FMM, JKR, ST etc.) published the following documents:

(a) "Energy Efficiency And Conservation Guidelines for Malaysian Industries" published in July 2007. This document address the detail technical practice for EE as oppose to performance-based criteria listed in the MS1525 (no download due to copyright. Contact PTM for purchase).

(b) Recognising that a major sector of energy are thermal equipment in industry, a 'thermal workgroup' is currently looking at drafting guidelines for energy efficiency. The topic covered under this workgroup include boilers, heat recovery unit, cogeneration, absorption chillers, ovens. The 'guideline' on thermal is schedule for publication in 2009.

Unfunished Matters & Unfulfilled Dreams

ASEAN-Energy Grid Currently 'deregulation' of the energy markets is in stasis. The Malaysian public is currently soured out on privatisation and especially the privitisation mode of IPPs. The dream of an ASEAN-wide energy exchange centered in Malaysia is as yet unfulfilled. However this dream refuses to go away with the àTrans-ASEAN Gas Pipeline (TAGP) and à the ASEAN Power Grid.

Energy Audits and Energy Managers. As of this date and despite some objections from ACEM, (of which the undersigned is a member – another blog will have to be written on this subject) the draft Act/Regulation is accepted by the Energy Commission and enactment of a new law making energy audits, energy efficient programme and the employment of energy managers or technicians mandatory for Malaysian Industry IS STILL AWAITING enactment (Parliament) or approved (Minister) (though I was told by sources that this agenda is still very much on the table despite the 5 years wait).

PTM Unspun The establishment of PTM during the early years carries much possibilities for the energy industry in Malaysia. Energy can be considered a strategic issue in the national agenda and it include multidisciplinary expertise in economics, engineering, sociology and politiics. Befitting its importance as a strategic issue (similar to national security and geopolitics), the formulation of energy policies and strategies should be based on indepth studies and analysis. In line with this, the Energy Commission (the principal though not the only regulator) should have a research arm focusing on energy economics and technology (i.e. ST needs a the brain to perform its task of regulating and strategising for the energy industry). As examples:

a survey of ofgem, uk (office of gas and electricity market) website reveals the depth of information and knowledge base available.
The US department of energy (go here à(website) again shows the depth of information and studies; all intimately linked to the department.
A look at PTM website shows their mission statement àptm.aboutus. The vision statement in my opinion is flawed.

Unfortunately (this is only my private opinion and apologies to alternate views), PTM in trying to establish themself as the chair of the (then in 2003) newly formed Association of Energy Service Company (ESCO) and professionals give the impression that they are disconnected (or maybe they are?) from the Energy Commission (by normal practice ESCO association should be an NGO). Due to this they seem to be a disjoint between the three Government funded agencies on energy; viz Ministry of Energy, Water and Communications, Suruhanjaya Tenaga and Pusat Tenaga Malaysia. At look at their website will reveal the overlap between the three organisations. It is my opinion that PTM should return to an agenda as a high-powered think tank and research institute, serving and advising the Energy Commission and the Ministry of Energy and should be fully funded by the Government).

CETREE Unplug Since the halcyon days of its inaugration CETREE seems to be suffering from a lack of program. Check their programme, research, publication and activities tab on their website. It would seem that CETREE exist purely to educate schools on EE. The industry seems to be totally NOT in CETREE agenda (perhaps that was the intention?).

Fragmentation of Energy Regulation The Malaysian energy industry is fragmented among a number of regulatory regimes and authories:

1. Petronas under the 'Petroleum Development Act, 1974' controls the upstream and down stream oil and gas industry.

2. The Energy Commission under the Ministry of Energy regulates the retail and demand-side of the energy industry under the jurisdiction of the 'Electricity Act 1990' and the 'Gas Supply Act 1993'.

3. The Ministry of Transport Malaysia (Jabatan Pengakutan Malaysia) regulates the transportation sector.

The transportation sector consumes about 37.8% of total energy which is a massive amount by any standard

Energy Use by Sector (PetaJoule) Source:http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN017512.pdf


Sectors	1995	2000	2005
Industrial	337.5 – 36.4%	432.9 – 37.1%	650 – 38.2%
Transport	327.8 – 35.3%	422.8 – 36.2%	642.5 – 37.8%
Residential & Commercial	118.8 – 12.8%	147.8 – 12.7%	213.2 – 12.5%
Non-energy	125.4 – 13.5%	142.8 – 12.2%	165.2 – 9.7%
Agriculture	18.7 – 2%	20.8 – 1.8%	28.9 – 1.8%
Total	928.2 – 100%	1,167.1 – 100%	1,688.8 – 100%

A a check on MoT website shows that the Ministry's strategic plan (view here àMoT) do not contain any statement on Energy Efficiency.

5th Fuel Agenda/Biomass The biomass initiative launched with much fanfare, loads of funding, support from international agencies (DANIDA, UNDP) and with more than 60 over projects approved in the early 2000s is to-date limping along. A check on the Ministry website and the Energy Commission website seems to show that the 5th fuel policy and target for biomass as a fuel has vanish or is hard to find. Check with published statistics here (page 41 for 2005) shows:

that only 6 projects are up and running.
the total installed capacity is only 39MW out of a national total installed capacity of 26.8GW (a miniscule sub percent).
Only large projects can be considered (the smallest running is the 2MW landfill gas project, all others are 6MW and above).

Major reasons for this (only my opinion) are as follows (in order of importance):

high standby and startup charges by TNB, where, as in most cases, standby or top-up supply is required from the public grid, the charges imposed will effectively render the project non-viable. Therefore the first criteria must be generation from biomass is totally surplus for export back to the grid.
rate of electricity exported back to the grid paid by TNB is too low; this issue has been a contentious one between industry and the public electricity supplier (TNB) and some form of subsidy from Government has been suggested.
high interconnection cost (all interconnection to the grid will have to be borne by the proposer).
other issue will have to depend on the consistency of biomass and load profile (which resides with the project proposer).

As a comparison Thailand biomass initiatives and agenda can be gleaned from this paper here-biogen3.

Flagging Resolve Though the early part of the decade saw a flurry of acitivities, currently regulatory initiatives on E.E. are almost at a standstill. Some initiatives still on the table (since 2003):

(a) Citation of MS1525 in the latest revision to the Uniform Building By-Law. This will have far reaching consequences as it will make it mandatory for architects and engineers to design to EE standards. Issues relating to this include:

Not enough understanding by architects on the MS1525, as building shell design is the first issue of EE (OTTV calculations). Inevitably many M&E engineers will be at the butt-end of architects on the MS1525 and EE (the author has already experienced this).
Insufficient education of local authorities who will have to gauge compliance to MS1525 in building plan submission.

(b) Despite its publication (MS1525) in 2001, to-date it is practically unknown by many practitioners in industry. Reasons, insufficient promotion and non-compulsion in usage even for government project.

Next Topic à3A E.E. Standards (Overview)

Energy Efficiency – 1 The Malaysian Context

2008-08-17T04:08:00.001-07:00

As Malaysia (and the world) is currently facing
an energy crunch, engineers will be increasingly asked about their expertise or knowledge on energy efficiency and green technology and its application in building, factory and process design and facility management. Having being active in many national forums on energy in Malaysia, I will attempt to present some perspective (with specific focus for the design and consulting engineers) on energy and energy efficiency in a series of articles in this blog post.

This introductory article give a brief overview of Energy Efficiency (E.E.) and energy markets in Malaysia. Hopefully with a background perspective on the issue at hand, readers can embark on the design and technical aspect of E.E.

Liberalisation of Energy Markets (Electricity)
Energy became a serious issue of interest to the Government during the 1990s in tandem with the then trend of 'privatisation' and 'liberalisation'. Hot on the heels of "Thatcherism" (from the 1980s) 'deregulation' and 'liberalisation' were twin pillars of the new economic energy sweeping the country up to the end of the 20th century (though 'liberalisation' can be viewed as the 'poor' twin). By the early 2000s, the generation end of the electricity market was liberalised (albeit partially) with the establishment of Independent Power Producers (IPP). However the California energy crisis of 2000 marked a transition in the public debate over 'privatisation' and 'liberalisation'. For a refresher on the California crisis, go à here (sfgate.com) and à here (ucsusa.org).
While in Malaysia, we were still debating and getting confused over the merits of liberalisation and deregulation ('liberalisation' does not mean deregulation and 'liberalised markets' in fact require stronger regulations to ensure fair market practice), Singapore was (by 2003) further down the road of liberalisation with the freeing of the retail and generation end of the electricity market and the establishment of power pools and exchange. System transmission (of electricity, also termed the system operator) however still remain under the control of one government corporatised entity. TNB which has all along been resisting this trend of breaking their monolithic structure managed to hold their position and currently 'liberalisation' of the energy market in Malaysia is in stasis.

Overview of Energy Markets
An overview of energy markets in Malaysia can be reviewed from the diagrams above.
Figure 1 – Total Energy Production, Consumption & Intensity of Usage (Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/)
The gap between production and consumption represents the amount exported. Energy intensity is an economic indicator measuring the energy required to produce a unit of GDP (in US$ corrected by US$2000 for inflation). For a full explaination of energy intensity go here à
wikipedia.
Figure 2 – Oil Production, Consumption and Proven Reserves (Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov)
The gap between production and consumption represents the amount exported.
Figure 3 – Gas Production, Consumption and Proven Reserves (Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov)
The gap between production and consumption represents the amount exported.
Figure 4 – Energy Used in Malaysia (Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov)
The gap between generation and consumption represents the loss (transmission loss, idling etc.)

All the datas summarised in the charts can be obtained --> here. From the graphs above, we can conclude as follows:
(1) Malaysia as a resource rich country is a nett energy exporting country. As to whether this is a 'curse' (go here --> wiki and here--> "Encyclopedia of Earth") OR a blessing (context here --> slate and here --> aftenposten). can be balance by reading these reports here --> standford.edu and here --> dai.com.
(2) Since about 2003, the gap between production and consumption has narrowed and with no new major finds expected, Malaysia will be a nett energy importer in about 15 to 20 years (charts 1, 2 & 3).
(3) Chart 3 on natural gas affirms the importance of natural gas to the national economy. Malaysia is touted as one of the largest exporter of LNG in the world accounting for about 25% of Asia/Oceania and 3% of world total.

Next --> Legal infrastructure

TNB-ACEM Dialogue 30 July 2008

2008-08-02T01:01:00.001-07:00

On 30th July 2008, ACEM and TNB held a dialogue at TNB HQ, Petaling Jaya. The following persons attended

From ACEM: Ir. Dr. Abdul Majid Abu Kassim, Ir. Wong Shu Leong, Ir. Looi Hip Peu, Ir Wong See Fong, Ir Toh Ai Ching

From TNB: Yg Bhg Ir Hj Dato' Amir Nordin, Hj. Zaharudding Tajul Arus, Hj Roslan Ab Rahman, En Mohd Niza Wan Zin, Hj. Megat Said Megat Ramli, Dr Leong Yow Peng, Hj Abu Bakar Ismail, Hj. Mokhtar Ishak, Ir Nirinder Singh, Dr Abu Hanifah Azer, Hj. Mohd Hadi Sobod

TNB delivery system

Though there are still some complaints regarding TNB delivery system (connection of supply, late in reply, inconsistent requirement etc), the author is of the opinion that since the publication of the handbook, TNB delivery system has improved somewhat compared to a decade ago and tremendously compared to 2 decades ago!

Specifics issues touched on during the dialogue relates to a complaint by a member on 33kV supply;

Onerous charges for hydraulic pipe jacking. TNB reply that this is beyond their control as it is imposed by DBKL. HPLooi remarked that he had a recent case involving 6km telekom cables in the center of KL city where DBKL DID NOT impose any pipe jacking charges;
Inconsistent requirement e.g. 10m clearance for transformer room. TNB inform that they will look into including standardised conditions in the handbook for 33kV PPU. The author is of the opinion that whilst you can standardised single/double chamber substation, we should not promote a highly standardised version for 33kV PPU (whether outdoor type, standalone or incorporated into complex). The undersigned has a lot of experience in designing 33kV/11kV, 132/33/11kV PMU, PPU etc. and especially where space is a constraint and a premium (city centre, central business district etc), leeway should be given to the experienced design consultant. With regards to unreasonable demand by TNB personal during building handing over, the undersigned advice that if sufficient documetary evidence of approval is obtained during planning stage, you can successfully rebuff unreasonable demand AFTER construction (the author's experience).

Fire Fighting System

TNB is currently reviewing standard requirement for inert gas agent for TNB substation. Due to market force, pyrogen (being the cheapes) is currently the most popular. ACEM stand is that the old standard of CO2 is sufficient and the specification of inert gas agent is over specification and a drain on the country's resources.

TNB inform of cases of Pyrogen discharge wherein the residue from discharge is a problem for electrical switch gears. Ir Wong See Fong also caution TNB on gas agents which are not properly certified. Ir. HP Looi inform that Pyrogen is not an inert gas agent but an aerosal discharge. TNB inform that they cannot reject pyrogen as it is approved by Jabatan Bomba. Ir Wong (being member or is it chairman of IFE) should pursue this issue with Jabatan Bomba.

Standard Voltage 400V/230V

HPLooi enquire current measures taken by TNB to convert system voltage to 400V/230V nationwide. TNB answered in the affirmative and will make a public annoucement soon. All ACEM members should be informed that our national voltage is now 400V, 3 phase/ 230V single phase NOT 415V 3p/230V 1p.

Background to voltage normalisation

Back in 2002/03, Suruhanjaya Tenaga convene an industry-wide committee to look into initiative to bring our national voltage to 400V/230V from 415V/240V of which the author was a member (Ir. Melanie Cheng was my alternate in this committee). Reasons for this normalisation of voltage:

Countries who are members of the IEC (international electrotechnical commission) are standardising to 400V/230V. UK started in late 1990s and is already fully 400V/230V complaint, S'pore (I believe) started this in early 2000s and (I believe) is currently fully 400/230V compliant. Countries of IEC still NOT within the normalised voltage band are; China (380V/200V); India (415V/240V), Germany (380V/200V). Note also that IEC voltage standards are different, system-wise, from US voltage standards which have 200V/110V 2p/1p centre-tap.

Moving towards normalised 400V/230V will bring us in-line with international standards. Currently Malaysian exporters who serve the local market and export market have to test their product to 2 standards (the higher 415V/240V for local and 400V/230V for export).

Most electrical products (motors, lighting appliances etc.) can operate within a voltage band of (usually from 200V to 240V for single phase and from 380V to 420V for 3 phase). Most appliances are designed to operate at optimum characteristics (i.e. efficiency and life span) on 400V/200V. Therefore at 400/230V the life span of electrical equipment will (theoretically) be slightly longer.

Voltage Normalising Committee time-line (based on experience of UK & S'pore) of at least 8 years from 2003 to fully convert to 400V/230V):

TNB was also in the committee. TNB commissioned a study in 2002/3 and concluded that the conversion is technically feasible and will not incurr substantial cost.
Time-line; 1st stage declared voltage at 400V +15%, -6%; 2nd stage declared voltage at 400V +10`%, -6%, final stage declared voltage at 400V+6%, -6%. We are currently at Stage 2.

Steps for consulting engineer to design to 400V/230V:

Change all specifications to 400V 3-phase; 230V 1-phase;
Specify transformer at 11kV/420V instead of 11kV/433V
Please check current carrying capacities again as 400V will incurr about 4% higher current compared to 415V. Coupled with voltage drop requirement of 6%, some design may be borderline.

SAIDI, Electrical System Reliability & Power Quality (PQ)

TNB table SAIDI figures for peninsular malaysia. SAIDI/SARFI statistics for Malaysia compares quite favourably with USA, Canada. Lowest SAIDI figure is S'pore, Japan.
ACEM enquired whether SAIDI/SARFI figures which are localised are available, as the figures published by TNB are national average only. These figures are important for consulting engineers as they are frequently requested to provide such figures and in the experience of the author, many (TNB) district engineers are usually not conversant on this issue. TNB will look into providing said figures at district level.
TNB present an information request form on harmonics for filling by consumers. Though the form is not mandatory (ref: MAPA form is mandatory) Consultant engineer is duty-bound to request consumers who may have non-linear loads to submit such forms.
TNB inform that standards on harmonics (IEC61000), voltage flicker, dips & sags (documents G5/4 and P28) will be baseline for approval of installation. ACEM need to monitor this issue. Ir. HPLooi highlighted during the meeting that ensuring compliance by consumer during CF may be easy. However ensuring that the public network comply may be a problem, as consumers may not comply (after CFO) period. Anecdotal evidence (in the authors experience) of "dirty" public network in Klang/shah alam south in mid 1990s contributed to repeated failure of a large precision DC motor in a facility in Shah Alam.
TNB is aware of the problem raised by HPLooi and has since resolved the issue.
Background SARFI & SAIDI are measures of system reliability. SARFI = System Average Rms Frequency Index measures voltage dips & sags and would be of interest to consulting engineer designing for a voltage sensitive facility e.g. state of the art steel mill; data centre; facilities for high precision manufacturing etc.
SAIDI = System Average Interuption Duration Index measures the statistics of voltage interuption. This figures will decide whether standby generators are required and for up to what extent. SAIDI figures may differ from locality to locality e.g. SAIDI for Jalan Meru Klang is NOT the same as SAIDI in Kulim hi-tech.
Electricity Tariff

Tariff increase was announce to come into effect on 1st July 2008. The new tariff structure is on a graded scale for domestic consumer. Those using less than 400W will not be affected. Those using above 400W and depending on your usage (escalating scale) you will be slap with an increase from 15% to 40% (including the undersigned due to heavy aircond usage). TNB spent some time trying to convince ACEM on the rationale to increase tariff. Go to TNB website http://www.tnb.com.my/

Note: However there is some hint that the govt may look at reducing tariff or provide some relieving measures for businesses (caution this is not confirmed).

Industry Statistics
As usual TNB roll out their statistics on the electricity markets:

Generation level current 2008 at 20GW
TNB reserve margin is 42% (this is at unhealthy level, an efficient market should have reserve margin of about 15%). In layman terms we generate much more electricity than we can use and electricity cannot stored or sold at a future.
SAIDI index in 2000 was around 350 minutes (ie around 15 days outage per year), in 2004 was around 160minutes and currently in below 160minutes.
USA /Canada currently has SAIDI of slightly above 200, Spore SAIDI is single digit, Japan is in the low 20s.
Registered customers of TNB:

Domestic - 85% (over 6 million consumers)
Commercial – 15% (just over 1 million consumers)
Industrial – less than 1%. (less than 40,000)
Others (mining, street lights etc) 1%
However compare with revenue earned:

Domestic – 14%
Commercial – 25%
Industrial – less than 55%.

Energy Efficiency/ Demand Side Management (DSM)

DSM has been a topic since the last decade. FMM frequently request TNB to provide data on efficiency of generation and of IPP at national forum (at least the fora I was active in from 2002 to 2005). Example HP Looi inquire whether there are any statistics on max/min ratio for generation as this is ONE indication of generation/utilistaion. TNB was not prepared with answer to this issue during dialogue.

HP Looi raised the issue of peak/off peak tariff structure (C2 & E2) being not friendly to consumers, i.e. it do not encourage usage of peak/off peak tariff due to the higher MD charge for C2/E2 tariff. Due to this many marginal consumers e.g. large commercial complex or industry using above 2MW will not find it worthwhile to opt for C2/E2 tariff, example thermal storage system for large commercial user.

TNB noted this and inform that if ACEM has any proposal they will be happy to look on an individual basis. Some measures to encourage usage of C2/E2 tariff suggested by TNB may be:

Extend peak/off peak hours from (current) 10pm to 800am to (proposed) 9pm to 9am, i.e. 2 hours extension.
Some form of discount or tariff rebate for 7 years may be looked at for certain application e.g. ice storage for large complex (4000RT and above).

However, the proposals above are NOT currently published and if ACEM members have any proposal, they are welcome to discuss with Dr. Leong.

ACEM should inform all their members of this issue as energy will be an important market for ACEM members.

TNB request ACEM to provide a list of ACEM members who have expertise in Energy Efficiency as they have been frequently requested to provide such list by consumers (industry & commercial). ACEM should issue a general notice to members to register themselves as EE expert.

Active Directors of Consulting Engineering Firm & Treasury Registration

2008-05-15T20:12:00.000-07:00

Back in around 2003/2004 (i think), I was drafted into a working group (WG) convene by the board of engineers malaysia (BEM) to look into the issue of definition of 'active' directors and treasury condition for registration.

The original initiative was by Dato' Ir. Dr. Abdul Rashid who was (at that time, during the tenure of Dato' Zaini) a board member of BEM & council member of ACEM. The reasons for this WG:

1) Treasury registration for consultant company include the onerous condition where all directors must be 'active'
2) Since the govt is a major user of consulting services, treasury registration for consulting firms is therefore a major issue.
3) However, current BEM definition of 'active' means that the director must lodge his license to sign in the particular company of which he is 'active'. Professional engineers are allowed to be share holder and directors in more than one consulting company but they are only allowed to be 'active' in one company.
4) In current trend of globalisation and 'going up the economic ladder' for our country, the service sector is an important sector for nurturing by the govt. Building capacity is one initiative towards growing this sector. However in capacity building, directors of consulting company will find themselves having cross-holding shares in multiple companies. Many companies will find themselves affected due to their treasury registration which cannot be ignored.
5) When the WG was convened, it was felt that,
a) treasury condition on 'active directors' is an impediment to capacity building for many consulting company. The principle reason for the wg was to address this issue.
I certainly agree with this agenda!
Note: many members may not be aware that registration with treasury is a REQUIREMENT if you intend to take on federal/state govt projects. Many members have this idea that registration with treasury is only restricted to bumiputra company. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Non-bumiputra and even foreign company can register with treasury. However the particular govt agency awarding project MAY impose conditions on bumiputra participation or the % of bumiputra shareholding. Thus NOT registering with treasury is a SERIOUS MARKETING MISTAKE by ANY company. However the impediment to registration is that ALL directors MUST BE ACTIVE.

b) there were some difference in opinion by members as to whether it would be wise to change bem definition of 'active'; i.e. do you allow engineers to be 'active' in more than 1 company? Some members feel bem definition of 'active' unnecessarily "tie-up" our members restricting expansion (for ambitious engineers). The more conservative (wg) members reminded that the original definition of 'active' was instituted back in the 1980s when engineering failures were attributed to engineers who were over extended.
Note: Though I am somewhat neutral on this issue, I find that most senior engineers are against whilst younger engineers are for redefining 'active' by allowing engineers to be 'active' in more than 1 company

The BEM is currently convening this WG again. While I am not at liberty to post the working papers on this blog, I would certainly welcome comments and feedback on this issue.

Forum for M&E engineers.

2008-04-01T10:35:00.001-07:00

Welcome to this blogspot. I am a M&E engineer based in Damansara Utama, Petaling Jaya, Selangor and have been practicing as a consulting engineer since 1980. As I am quite active in a number of technical and non-technical fora of the engineering community in Malaysia, I publish papers, submit opinions and sporadic post online. This blogspot will consolidate some of the issues I have dealt with in the past years. I will also reply to queries or provide a platform for discussions on topics listed below. Hopefully this blogspot will reach a wide audience. Topics I deal with are as follows:

(1) professional practice

(2) wiring practice

(3) general electrotechnical topics

(4) energy efficiency & renewable energy

(5) globalisation & engineers