5 Ways to Get More Out Of Your Fire Engineer

Nowadays, most buildings are impossible to construct without a Fire Engineer on your team. As a result, the understanding of Fire Engineering by construction professionals has improved immensely. This is good news.

Unfortunately, too many design teams still view Fire Engineering as an extra cost or burden. This is bad news. As such, the Fire Engineering scope is often reduced to remove perceived additional services. Unfortunately, I have seen this lead to oversights, delays and unnecessary embarrassment. All of which could have been avoided if the Fire Engineer was involved from the beginning of the project.

The industry is missing a real opportunity here. Well executed, Fire Engineering will provide the following project benefits:

• Expertly coordinated Engineering and Architectural documentation.
• A clear description of how the building should respond in fire mode.
• Flexibility and design freedom.
• A measured and documented level of safety for building occupants.
• Rationalisation of construction costs.

To help you execute on your next project and extract the maximum value from your Fire Engineer, I have put together 5 simple tips for you to use. Why not try implementing these on your next project? It would be great hear how you get on.

Engage a Fire Engineer at the beginning of the Project.

The Fire Engineer is responsible for developing the Fire Safety Strategy, which outlines how the building should work in fire mode. This strategy must be in place at the start of the project. Without it, critical inputs (for example, amendments to Australian Standards) necessary for the team to complete their designs are missing.

The most challenging projects to work on are those where I am brought onto the design team late. Why? Because this means the design team are not working toward a unified Fire Safety Strategy. A recipe for disaster.

As a result, the Fire Engineer is working in a reactive environment. In the worst case, late delivery of the Fire Safety Strategy results in design changes, poor coordination, and a frantic dash to gain approvals. This approach leads to surprises in the form of variations. Nobody likes those.

Below I have listed five project symptoms that indicate you should have already engaged a Fire Engineer:

• The BCA consultant has generated a list of DtS non-compliances after reviewing the design. Fire Engineers are being asked to price this list.
• The project is at the Schematic Design or Tender Stage.
• Frozen Architectural backgrounds form the basis of the engineering design.
• The building services design is ‘complete'. Except that specifications and drawings contain caveats such as ‘pending outcomes of Alternative Solutions’.
• Design team meetings have been occurring for some months in the absence of a Fire Engineer.

The BCA Consultants job is to determine whether a building design complies with the Deemed-to-Satisfy (DtS) Provisions of the BCA. This review results in the generation of a non-compliance schedule. To address these non-compliances the design team have the following options:

1. Change the design to meet the DtS Provisions. Changes are often unpopular as they may be impractical or compromise the architectural intent; or
2. Engage a Fire Engineer to develop an Alternative Solution.

It makes sense, from a process point of view, to have the BCA Consultant generate the compliance schedule first. The Fire Engineer can provide an accurate price for this list. A more efficient approach is to engage the Fire Engineer early to assist the BCA Consultant. The Fire Engineer will take an opportunistic view of the project. This results in the inclusion of 'value add' Alternative Solutions and the following benefits:

• Surety about the requirements of all Alternative Solution earlier in the project.
• Time to really explore client requirements and improve co-ordination.
• An opportunity to rationalise project and construction costs.

I have worked on projects where I have suggested Alternative Solutions outside of the Tender set. These have been declined because of the extra consultancy costs - even though the solution would reduce project costs. Unfortunately, in some cases, where the Project Manager has been keen to proceed the project was too far down the track to explore these. Another symptom of employing the Fire Engineer too late in the process.

To reach the Scheme Design or Tender Stage, a significant amount of design documentation is complete. Producing an Alternative Solution at this late stage may result in new or changes to initial input parameters. For example, a Fire Engineering analysis may be required to determine smoke exhaust quantities. The result of the study may be different to the original assumptions made by the Mechanical Engineer. A minor change to a fan may be all that is needed to rectify this problem. However, it could mean a complete redesign of the smoke management system or an amendment to the Development Application as make-up air louvres are changed. In all, a costly exercise.

Again, the above results in variations and delays. Unfortunately, this often has the effect of making the Fire Engineer out to be ‘the bad guy who caused all the changes’. Often, it is not their fault. Bear in mind it takes guts to speak out in this situation and stand up for the safety of the eventual occupants of the building.

The key is to engage the Fire Engineer as early in the project as possible. In this way, a completed design team can develop the non-compliance list together. The team is therefore on the same page from the start. The result? Effective co-ordination and project savings. In short, the best outcome.

Understand the Fire Engineering Process does not follow Typical Project Stages.

An Alternative Solution justifies a change or complete replacement of a DtS Provision. The difference between the two? Alternative Solutions need engineering justification. DtS Provisions do not.

As a result, a project based only on DtS Provisions has all the design input information up front. For an Alternative Solution, this is not the case. The Fire Engineering analysis may be complicated. Computational modelling does not happen overnight. As such, confirmation of Fire Engineering requirements is not available until part way through the project.

Furthermore, the Fire Engineering process involves stakeholders who do not report to the project. The best example of this is the Fire Brigade. Experienced Fire-Fighter input is critical for complex projects. However, you are at the beck and call of their procedures and requirements. Don't expect them to respond as quickly as an engineer with a consultancy fee.

In an ideal world, the Fire Engineering process should be complete before any of the design consultants lift up a pen. Clearly, this is impractical. Thus, the Fire Engineering process runs in tandem with the Development Application, Concept, Scheme, and Tender process. This has the unfortunate effect of putting the Fire Engineer in conflict with project timelines.

A good Fire Engineer will explain the potential timing pitfalls upfront. I urge you to support the time it takes to provide an engineering solution and interact with Stakeholders. Which brings us nicely to the next tip.

Put your Fire Engineer in front of the right Stakeholders.

I love the multi-discipline component of Fire Engineering. A good understanding of Architectural requirements, engineering services and buildability is paramount. However, I did not realise that consulting with stakeholders was so important when I started out as a Fire Engineer.

For example, it is no good developing a solution that is impossible to manage while the building is in operation. Only the team that will manage the development can tell you what impossible means in this case. Furthermore, you cannot complete an evacuation strategy (or a Fire Matrix) without knowing if an investigation period is required. Maybe the onsite emergency management team are the only people who can tell you that?

The only way to understand all the requirements of a project is to consult with every stakeholder. As such, it is paramount that your Fire Engineer consults with all of them. Face-to-face conversations are the only effective way to do this. People without an engineering background struggle to understand complex concepts over the phone or via email. In person meetings take time. However, you will often uncover Client requirements that you didn't expect (tip: your Client will love you for just asking).

Any Fire Engineer worth their salt should know the core group of stakeholders who need consultation. You should be on the front foot and encourage these interactions. A bonus is that the Client feels listened too, oh yeah... and you get a better result.

Insist Upon the Development of a Fire Engineering Brief.

The Fire Engineering Brief (FEB) is an incredibly important document. The FEB contains the input parameters and assumptions that form part of the Fire Engineering analysis

It is imperative that every member of the design team review the FEB in detail. The project risks and costing requirements generated through this process will surprise you. In my experience, some of the potential risks that the FEB process has highlighted are:

• Existing fire panels requiring upgrades or replacement to support enhanced fire detection systems.
• Inclusion and location of isolation valves for wall-wetting sprinkler systems.
• Inadequate pressure and flow performance of fire hydrant systems.

The project will experience incorrect Tender pricing, delays, and extra cost if you do not pick these items up early. In the worst case, the Fire Engineering analysis is complete before picking up these oversights. In this case, not only will design issues need attention but the Fire Engineering Report will require rework.

Often, it may seem like the production of a Fire Engineering Brief is an extra step - especially for smaller projects. However, I can guarantee that by putting the design team through the process you will end up with a more coordinated result.

Hold Fire Engineering Coordination Workshops and Construction Stage Inspections.

No one like surprises. Ever. However, too often during a final sign-off inspection, I will notice a major defect that could jeopardise project handover. Three of the worst oversights I have seen are:

• Installing the wrong type of sprinkler heads across the entire roof of a warehouse.
• No stair pressurisation system installed to fire stairs serving an atrium.
• Missing the Fire Rating to the structural elements on the top storey of a hospital building.
• Smoke exhaust ductwork installed but not connected to a fan.
• Fire and smoke dampers missing from a healthcare facility.

Often the defects are only minor. However, lots of small problems often add up to a major headache. Changes in a compressed time frame result in variations, delays and unnecessary embarrassment. Unfortunately, the Fire Engineer ends up looking like the bad guy for pointing out the mistake.

The fix is simple. Hold Fire Engineering Coordination Meetings at the design stage. These are not just general design team meetings. I recommend that all team members sit with the Fire Engineer to understand the exact requirements. I mean everybody. Design Consultants, Architects, Lead Contractors and the sub-Trades. The lot.

I also recommend you ask your Fire Engineer to attend site at various during construction. Why? To pick up problems. For example, I inspected a site that had been in construction for 6months. The total construction program was 18 months. Within 20 minutes of being on site, I picked up that the fire hydrant booster and several firewalls were in the wrong place.

Fixing errors 12 months out from practical completion is far easier than spotting them a day before the project handover.

Holding these meetings will incur a cost. However, your team will end up with a much better understanding of what is expected from them. Remember, you cannot be over-co-ordinated.

Conclusion

The absolute bottom line in getting the most from your Fire Engineer is to engage them at the inception of your project. This means that critical design inputs are fixed earlier in the project, which results in effective design coordination. Furthermore, you will be able to explore the real potential of your project by really meeting client requirements and taking every opportunity to rationalise cost.

Bonus Tips

Below are two bonus tips for getting even more out of your Fire Engineer.

#1 - Put Fire Engineering items at the start of your meetings. The Fire Safety Strategy will filter into most of the other engineering disciplines. By putting Fire Engineering at the start of your meeting, you will limit the number of interrupts later. Why? Because consultants will not need to refer back to Fire Engineer for confirmation later in the meeting.

#2 - Push hard for opportunities. Fire Engineers love a challenge. Push your Fire Engineer to pull every reasonable opportunity out of you project. What they come up with will surprise you.

I hope the above tips will help you to run a more productive project. But, what have I missed? How do you get the most out of your Fire Engineer? I'd love to hear from you. Why not share your advice in the comments below.

This post first appeared here.