Performance-Based Electrical Power Chain Design

Loading
loading...

Fire Alarm & Signaling Code

August 26, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com

No Comments

“Prometheus Bound” | Thomas Cole (1847)

NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code is one of the core National Fire Protection Association titles widely incorporated by reference into public safety legislation.   NFPA 72 competes with titles of “similar” scope — International Fire Code — developed by the International Code Council.  We place air quotes around the word similar because there are gaps and overlaps depending upon whether or not each is adopted partially or whole cloth by the tens of thousands of jurisdictions that need both.

Our contact with NFPA 72 dates back to the early 2000’s when the original University of Michigan advocacy enterprise began challenging the prescriptive requirements for inspection, testing and maintenance (IT&M) in Chapter 14.  There are hundreds of fire alarm shops, and thousands of licensed fire alarm technicians in the education facility industry and the managers of this cadre of experts needed leadership in supporting their lower #TotalCostofOwnership agenda with “code-writing and vote-getting”.   There was no education industry trade association that was even interested, much less effective, in this space so we had to do “code writing and vote getting” ourselves (See ABOUT).

Code writing and vote getting means that you gather data, develop relationships with like minded user-interests, find agreement where you can, then write proposals and defend them at NFPA 72 technical committee meetings for 3 to 6 years.  Prevailing in the Sturm und Drang of code development for 3 to 6 years should be within the means of business units of colleges and universities that have been in existence for 100’s of years.  The real assets under the stewardship of these business units are among the most valuable real assets on earth.

Consider the standard of care for inspection, testing and maintenance.  Our cross-cutting experience in over 100 standards suites allows us to say with some authority that, at best the IT&M tables of NFPA 72 Chapter 14 present easily enforceable criteria for IT&M of fire alarm and signaling systems.  At worst, Chapter 14 is a solid example of market-making by incumbent interests as the US standards system allows.   Many of the IT&M requirements can be modified for a reliability, or risk-informed centered maintenance program but fire and security shops in the education industry are afraid to apply performance standards because of risk exposure.   This condition is made more difficult in large universities that have their own maintenance and enforcement staff.  The technicians see opportunities to reduce IT&M frequencies — thereby saving costs for the academic unit facility managers — the enforcement/compliance/conformity/risk management professionals prohibit the application of performance standards.  They want prescriptive standards for bright line criteria to make their work easier to measure.

While we have historically focused on Chapter 14 we have since expanded our interest into communication technologies within buildings since technicians and public safety personnel depend upon them.  Content in Annex G — Guidelines for Emergency Communication Strategies for Buildings and Campuses — is a solid starting point and reflects of our presence when the guidance first appeared in the 2016 Edition.  We shall start with a review of the most recent transcript of the NFPA Technical Committee on Testing and Maintenance of Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems

NFPA 72 First Draft Meeting (A2024)

Public Emergency Reporting Systems (SIG-PRS) First Draft

Public comment of the First Draft of the 2025 Edition is receivable until May 31, 2023.   As always, we encourage direct participation in the NFPA process by workpoint experts with experience, data and even strong opinions about shortcomings and waste in this discipline.  You may key in your proposals on the NFPA public input facility linked below:

https://www.nfpa.org/login

You will need to set up a (free) NFPA TerraView account.   Alternatively, you may join us any day at 11 AM US Eastern time or during our Prometheus or Radio colloquia.   See our CALENDAR for the online meeting.

Issue: [15-213]

Category: Fire Safety & Security, #SmartCampus, Informatics

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Joe DeRosier, Josh Elvove, Jim Harvey, Marcelo Hirschler


More

2013 NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (357 pages)

TIA-222 Standard For Towers And Antenna Supporting Structures

 

Emergency Communication Strategies for Buildings

 

ARCHIVE / NFPA 72

National Center for Spectator Sports Safety and Security

 

What California College Students are Wearing

August 25, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , , , ,
No Comments

“Everything which is in any way beautiful is beautiful in itself….
That which is really beautiful has no need of anything”…
— Marcus Aurelius (Meditations)

No Logo Campus Apparel

Cheap Clothes and Costly Consequences

Textiles

Laundry

Evaluating devices to reduce microfiber emissions from washing machines

10 Tampa Bay

Liberty Bell March | John Philip Sousa

August 25, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

Campus Child Day Care

August 25, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, ,
No Comments
“The concentration of a small child at play
is analogous to the concentration of the artist at work.”

 

§
Page 522/523: 305.2 Group E, day care facilities for five or fewer children.
Page 624: Group E Security
Page 1440: Storm Shelters
§

Today at the usual hour we review a selection of global building codes and standards that guide best practice for safety, accessibility, and functionality for day care facilities; with special interest in the possibilities for co-locating square footage into the (typically) lavish unused space in higher education facilities. 

Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

International Building Code

    • Governs overall building construction, fire safety, occupancy classification, and egress requirements for daycare centers.

International Fire Code

    • Regulates fire prevention measures, emergency exits, fire alarms, sprinkler systems, and evacuation protocols for daycare centers.

National Fire Protection Association

    • NFPA 101 – Life Safety Code: Addresses occupancy classification, means of egress, fire safety, and emergency planning.
    • NFPA 5000 – Building Construction and Safety Code: Provides fire protection and structural safety guidelines.

Americans with Disabilities Act

    • Requires daycare centers to be accessible for children and parents with disabilities, covering entrances, bathrooms, play areas, and signage.

European Norms – CEN Standards

    • EN 1176 – Playground Equipment and Safety Requirements: Covers safety standards for daycare playgrounds and outdoor spaces.
    • EN 16890 – Safety Requirements for Mattresses in Children’s Products.

British Standards (BS) for Early Years Facilities

    • BS 8300: Accessibility requirements for childcare facilities.
    • BS 9999: Fire safety guidance for daycare and educational buildings.

Australian Building Code & National Construction Code

    • Covers fire safety, structural integrity, ventilation, and child safety measures for daycare centers.

ISO 45001 – Occupational Health and Safety Management

    • Establishes safety requirements for employees working in daycare facilities, ensuring a safe environment for both children and staff.

Canadian Building Code & Fire Code (NBC & NFC)

    • Provides structural, fire safety, and child safety guidelines for daycare centers in Canada.

“Kindergarten” 1885 Johann Sperl

Preschool Children in the Dome

Playgrounds

Kindergarten

Playgrounds

August 25, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments
…”Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.
You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams…”

 

Dufferin-Peel Catholic District Schools | Ontario

Outdoor play facilities for school children are governed by several key codes and standards to ensure safety and accessibility. The European Standard EN 1176 outlines safety requirements for playground equipment, covering design, installation, and maintenance to minimize risks like entrapment and falls.

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 mandates risk assessments and safe environments, while the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 (revised 1984) ensures playgrounds are reasonably safe for users.

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 holds manufacturers liable for defective equipment. The Children Act 1989 requires facilities to be suitable and safe. Ofsted emphasizes stimulating, inclusive, and varied play environments that promote physical and mental health, encouraging year-round outdoor learning. Compliance with these standards, alongside regular inspections (e.g., TÜV certification), ensures safe, durable, and engaging playgrounds that foster children’s development while minimizing injury risks.

Today at the usual hour we update our understanding of the technical literature that supports making these facilities safe, sustainable and enjoyable.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Playground Equipment

ASTM Playground Standards

Fences & Zoning

Bleachers, Folding Seating & Grandstands

Outdoor Power Equipment

Sichere Kinderspielplätze mit Standards

Sports, Recreational Facilities & Equipment

Morning Shower

August 25, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , ,
No Comments

Complete Monograph: 2024 GROUP A PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE I-CODES

Annual Conference Home Page

“The Bathing Pool” | Hubert Robert (1733–1808)

CLICK IMAGE to access complete text

 

Design Considerations for Hot Water Plumbing

Baseline Standards for Student Housing

2024/2025/2026 ICC CODE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE

Indoor plumbing has a long history, but it became widely available in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In the United States, for example, the first indoor plumbing system was installed in the Governor’s Palace in Williamsburg, Virginia in the early 18th century. However, it was not until the mid-19th century that indoor plumbing became more common in middle-class homes.

One important milestone was the development of cast iron pipes in the 19th century, which made it easier to transport water and waste throughout a building. The introduction of the flush toilet in the mid-19th century also played a significant role in making indoor plumbing more practical and sanitary.

By the early 20th century, indoor plumbing had become a standard feature in most middle-class homes in the United States and other developed countries. However, it was still not widely available in rural areas and poorer urban neighborhoods until much later.

International Plumbing Code

Form v. Function | Function v. Form

County Fair

August 24, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, ,
No Comments

Standards Arizona | Other Agricultural Extension Offices

Chandler High School

4-H is a U.S.-based network of youth organizations whose mission is “engaging youth to reach their fullest potential while advancing the field of youth development”. Its name is a reference to the occurrence of the initial letter H four times in the organization’s original motto head, heart, hands, and health, which was later incorporated into the fuller pledge officially adopted in 1927.  In the United States, the organization is administered by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture of the United States Department of Agriculture.

Maricopa County Cooperative Extension

Farm Electrical Power

Agriculture

Before the Harvest

Gallery: School Uniforms

August 23, 2025
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , ,
No Comments

Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions, school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. According to a 2020 report, the percentage of public schools that required school uniforms jumped from 12% in the 1999-2000 school year to 20% in the 2017-18 school year. School uniforms were most frequently required by elementary schools (23%), followed by middle (18%), and high schools (10%). (Encyclopedia Britannica)

PRO

School uniforms may deter crime and increase student safety.
School uniforms keep students focused on their education, not their clothes.
School uniforms create a level playing field among students, reducing peer pressure and bullying.
Wearing uniforms enhances school pride, unity, and community spirit.
School uniforms may improve attendance and discipline.
Uniform policies save valuable class time because they are easier to enforce than a standard dress code.
School uniforms prevent the display of gang colors and insignia.
School uniforms make getting ready for school easier, which can improve punctuality.
School uniforms can save parents money.
Most parents and educators support mandatory school uniforms.
Students’ legal right to free expression remains intact even with mandatory school uniforms.
Students dressed in uniform are better perceived by teachers and peers.
Students can express their individuality in school uniforms by introducing variations and adding accessories.

 


CON

School uniforms restrict students’ freedom of expression.
School uniforms promote conformity over individuality.
School uniforms do not stop bullying and may increase violent attacks.
School uniforms do not improve attendance, academic preparedness, or exam results.
The key findings used to tout the benefits of uniforms are questionable.
School uniforms emphasize the socio-economic divisions they are supposed to eliminate.
Students oppose school uniforms.
Uniforms may have a detrimental effect on students’ self-image.
Focusing on uniforms takes attention away from finding genuine solutions to problems in education.
The push for school uniforms is driven by commercial interests rather than educational ones.
Parents should be free to choose their children’s clothes without government interference.
School uniforms in public schools undermine the promise of a free education by imposing an extra expense on families.
School uniforms may delay the transition into adulthood.

Northville (Michigan) Christian School Dress Code

Parkway Christian School Dress Code | Sterling Heights Michigan

Style

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content