FEATURE: PA/VA
‘brave new world’ truly began in earnest in April 2011, with integrators thereafter required to use compliant (or exempt) products in addition to complying with relevant installation and performance standards. But with not all European countries signed up to the programme of European Directives (EDs), 16/24’s influence has hardly been consistent. “It’s really been a bit unclear for everyone,” says Tannoy product manager (pro- audio) Mark Copeland with admirable succinctness. Moreover, observes
[meaning that] they often exceed EN54 standards without modification. In some cases, we have upgraded materials to increase the fire- retardant qualities of the speaker.” But while these latest aspects of EN54 are now a part of everyday life, there is an “additional twist”, warns Steve Jones, consulting engineer and participant in the CEN TC72 WG3 European standards working group. Every standard has a ‘maintenance period’ of five years, meaning that every half-decade “the originating
Year in which EN54-16 and -24 were approved by CEN
2008
Harman Professional market analyst Dave Leverett, “the extremely high cost of certifying products means there are relatively few products currently certified” (see box opposite for more on the certification process). The situation is exacerbated by the trend for some companies to advertise ‘EN54-compliant’ products, which, adds Leverett, is “a little misleading since the product is not technically legal unless it was tested and certified by an accredited test facility”. Harman, for one, insists that
it is well ahead of the curve here. Leverett highlights the fact that many of its products were “already certified to UL life safety standards,
Although officially semi- retired, consulting engineer Steve Jones devotes a troubling amount of his spare time to the TC72 WG3 working group and its activities surrounding EN54. While applauding the input of those manufacturers – such as Ateïs, Bose, RCF and Current Thinking (whose voice alarm and fire telephone assets were purchased by Cooper Fire in May) – who have participated in panel work, he laments that many larger industry names have been absent. “The message I have been
giving for the past two years to the audio manufacturers is ‘You will get the standards you deserve if you leave it to others’ – especially ‘others’
22 August 2012
panel is required to review and either withdraw, amend or revise the standard”. Given that EN54-16 and -24 were approved by CEN in January 2008, this process should get underway during the first few weeks of next year. Within six months of the
review commencing, all relevant countries will undertake a vote to confirm whether the standards should be maintained for a further five years. A decision to withdraw them altogether is highly unlikely; a move to revise them less so. In the event of the latter outcome, the EN54 working group would be required to initiate an updated version, with a publication due date of 20 June 2016.
THE STANDARDS WE DESERVE?
from the fire industry,” he says. Proffering a specific
example, Jones remarks: “In their ignorance, construction companies are now buying the fire industry mantra that backstage should be traditional VA and the bowl of the stadium or arena can be pro-audio because a) it could technically be considered not a building (being without roof), and b) because the VA kit can’t meet the intelligibility requirements.” The need, therefore, is for
pro-audio to wield “the big stick called ‘intelligibility’ [in order to help] redress the balance and get the standards written sensibly now that the time is coming to review the existing sections and write Part 32”.
(To address another area of
lingering doubt, it should be noted at this juncture that international standard IEC60849 – which specifies performance requirements for sound reinforcement systems used indoors or outdoors to broadcast information for the protection of lives within specified areas in an emergency – has been withdrawn. However, the European harmonised version of EN60849, says Jones, “has not been withdrawn, as a result of objections from some countries – hence [we are] trying to revise it to remove any conflict with EN54 [thus making it the EN5 series]. The status is that the EN version is still in force and is still in conflict with EN54.” A proposed replacement, EN50849, was published as a DPC [Draft Publication for Comment] – the final stage before becoming a standard – but rejected by countries including the UK. As a result, EN60849 remains in force for now.)
2) What is the legal status of EN54-16 and -24? “The legal status of any standard is nil,” confirms Jones. “What happens is that legislation is brought in (nationally or Europe-wide) and this requires certain minimum efforts by those affected” – in this case, represented by the aforementioned CPD/CPR. So far, so simple – but as
Martijn van Overveld, EMEA product marketing manager public address & voice alarm at Bosch Security Systems, reminds, national law “determines whether or not an application requires a voice alarm system to be
Bosch has recently added to its EN54-compliant range with the XLA 3200 series
connected to a fire alarm system – [meaning that] the installation of EN54- compliant systems across Europe is not straightforward.” Further capacity for doubt
‘What’s clearly missing are education and control’ Albert van der Hout,
Ateïs International
is provided by the possible contention in some scenarios that a ‘kit’ system is being used to make a voice alarm, instead of a VACIE – thereby possibly negating the requirements of EN54. There are also specific exemptions for self-powered and ‘special application’ speakers. In reality, the CPR derives much of its substance from a requirement stating that the objective of minimising risk is likely to be achieved to an adequate degree if the products used are tested in a consistent fashion and carry the CE mark to demonstrate it. Accordingly, EN54 states that the products in each category may only display the CE mark if they have been type-tested to the relevant part of EN54. Unfortunately, cautions Jones, that is not the end of the matter. In addition to all products needing to feature the CE mark if they are to be sold in Europe, the type- tested ones must also carry a code. As a result, if the client “wants to ensure that he is not sued (under the Regulatory Reform Act) then he must post a man to check all products coming to site and that they have the correct CE mark”. Perceived in one way, EN54 is primarily a manufacturers’ responsibility. But as van Overfeld points out: “The total central system (central equipment including installation in the racks) is regarded as being subject to EN54. Therefore, the standard goes beyond only product certification, and so designers and installers have to be aware of what they can and cannot do.”
The upshot is that there is
an onus on installers and end- users to seek expert guidance with a keen eye on those ‘worst-case scenarios’. In this regard, manufacturers are certainly playing their part, with Bosch among those to have issued dedicated brochures and a booklet explaining the status of the standards. In addition, throughout 2012, the company is implementing EN54 in product training “to safeguard that products are EN54-certified and that the systems consisting of components are working correctly and according to EN54-16”.
3) What impact are the standards having on tender documents?
The consensus view is that EN54 is now factored into the vast majority of project specifications throughout Europe. But differing levels of competence mean that its implementation is – to put it mildly – the subject of variation. “Although we see that the majority of the specifications do require an EN54 certified system, when it comes to ordering and supplying, most of the installations do not comply simply because the installers have poor understanding of what the EN54 standard consists of,” says Albert van der Hout, international sales and marketing manager at voice alarm and sound installation technology specialist Ateïs International. “What’s clearly missing are education and control.”
Jones’s experience tells him that both consulting and electrical engineers are frequently lacking in detailed understanding of the standards’ requirements. For example: “The electrical engineer Googles voice alarm standards and up pops EN54 along with BS5389. A quick look at the descriptors and in
www.installation-international.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52