181.

Designing Fire Alarm Audibility

Robert P. Schifiliti, P.E.*
Fire Alarm Audibility
In most cases the purpose of a fire detection and alarm system is to
alert the occupants of a building that an emergency exists and to initiate
evacuation. In situations such as high rise or industrial buildings it may
be desirable to provide the occupants with more information, such as the
nature and location of the fire. In either case the purpose of the system
is defeated if the signal is not heard and understood by the occupants.
This article demonstrates a method for fire protection engineers to
estimate the relative effectiveness and cost of various fire alarm alerting
systems during the design process. In the past the selection and location
of fire alarm devices has been based on experience and engineering
judgment. The use of this simplified methodology can save thousands of
dollars in retrofit costs required to correct deficiencies in an alarm
system.
The transmission of sound from a source to a target is a function of
many factors, such as humidity; air viscosity and temperature; the
frequency of the signal; the location of the source relative to the target;
the construction of walls, floors, and ceilings; and the furnishings in the
area. Architectural Acoustics, 1 published by Bruel and Kjaer, contains
a good discussion of these and many other factors affecting sound
transmission and loss.
Sound power and sound pressure levels are expressed in decibels (dB)
relative to a reference. It is assumed that the reader is familiar with this
system of measurement. Throughout this note sound power level (SWL
orL W)in decibels is referenced to 10-1~watts. Sound pressure level (SPL
or L e) in decibels is referenced to 2 x 10 -s Pa. This discussion also
assumes that the reader is familiar with the concept of A-weighting. The
purpose of A-weighting is to adjust sound pressure-level measurements
to correspond as closely as possible to the way humans perceive the
loudness of the many different frequencies we hear. For instance, a
1000-Hz signal at an SPL of 20 dB would be clearly audible. A 100-Hz
signal at the same SPL would not be heard. A-weighting allows a single
number to describe the SPL produced by a signal containing frequencies
between 20 and 20,000 Hertz. The weighting of the various frequencies
is established by an internationally accepted A-weighting curve. ~
Typical fire alerting systems consist of a combination of audible and
visual signals activated by fire detection systems. The audible devices
are usually horns, bells, chimes, or speakers. The visual indicators are
usually strobe lights, incandescent lamps, or, occasionally, revolving
beacons.
*Fire Data Systems, Inc., 14 McIntire Street, Lowell, ~ 01851.
182 Fire Technology
In residential occupancies fire alerting systems must be capable of
awakening a sleeping person and informing them that a fire emergency
exists. Several studies have been done to establish the sound pressure
level required to achieve this. a,4 These studies suggest that an SPL
between 55 and 70 dBA will awaken a college-age person with normal
hearing. The m i n i m u m required SPL is also a function of the back-
ground noise or signal-to-noise ratio. These levels establish the SPL
required to alert or be audible. They do not address the problem of how
a person will perceive the sound or react to it.
In general, codes simply require that the signal be audible in all
occupiable spaces within a building. British standards require fire
alarm signals to produce a sound pressure level of 65 dBA, or 5 dBA above
ambient noise in areas where occupants are not sleeping. 5 A sound
pressure level of 75 dBA at the head of the bed is required in occupancies
where people may be sleeping.
Visual signals are located to assist people in deciphering potentially
confusing alarm signals. The visual signals also help alert occupants in
high background noise environments. They are not usually intended to
alert occupants who are sleeping or who have hearing impairments.
Butler, Bower, and Kew 2 have described a method to estimate sound
pressure levels at some location remote from the sound source. Formu-
las presented in the paper are analogous to standard sound attenuation
formulas found in other references2 ,e They have been simplified by
replacing complex terms with constants for which tables of data are
provided. The equations and data presented in Butler et al.'s paper
provide a straightforward method for analyzing proposed designs. The
same equations and data can be used to determine the power require-
m e n t and m a x i m u m allowable spacing of signaling devices required to
achieve a specified sound pressure level. The technique presented in
their paper is suitable for acoustically simple buildings only. Complex
building arrangements and materials may require a more rigorous
analysis using other methodologies.
To demonstrate how signaling systems can be designed and analyzed,
two scenarios will be considered. Both scenarios are based on a typical
dormitory or office layout. The building has long corridors with rooms
of equal size on each side. Each room is approximately 5 meters wide by
6 meters deep. The walls consist of two layers of sheetrock (total 25.4 m m
thick) separated by wood studs. The wall cavities contain 75 m m thick
mineral fiber insulation. The floors are concrete with carpeting. The
ceiling is 3 meters high and consists of acoustical tiles. The room doors
are solid core with good edge seals. The alerting systems will be designed
to achieve a 75 dBA sound pressure level at the farthest point in the
rooms.
In the first scenario, wall-mounted fire alarm speaker/light combina-
tions are spaced equally in the corridor. Calculations determine the
Fire Alarm Audibility 183
maximum allowable spacing of the speakers in order to achieve the
design goal of 75 dBA in the rooms.
In the second scenario, speakers are placed in each room as well as in
the corridor. Calculations determine the size speaker and the power
needed to drive that speaker to achieve the design goal of 75 dB.
Calculations are also presented to determine the required spacing of
speakers in the corridor to achieve a sound level of 65 dB.
Unless otherwise noted, the formulas and data that follow are from
Butler, Bower and KewY

Scenario A
In this scenario, the fire alerting system will consist of speaker/light
combinations in the corridors only.
L W is the sound power level of a horn, bell, speaker, or any sounder (dB
referenced to 10 -'2 watts).
L W= L + 20 loglo r + 11 dB
Here L is the manufacturers stated output at a distance r. A typical
compression driver-type fire alarm speaker powered at two watts has an
L equal to 94 dBA at 3.05 meters. 7 Therefore:
L W= 94 + 20 log, o (3.05) + 11
L W= 115 dB.
Lp1 is the sound pressure level (dBA referenced to 2 × l 0 s Pascals)
produced outside of a room wall from one speaker.
L~,,=Lw+C 3 +C, +C 5

Here, C3 is a correction for the number of directions that the sounder

propagates. C4 is a correction for the characteristics of the corridor
walls, ceiling and floors. C5 is a function of the distance from the sounder
to the center of the bedroom wall. From Butler et al.:2 C3 i s - 3 dB because
the speaker propagates in two directions along the corridor, C4 is -9 dB
because the floor and ceiling are acoustically soft, C5 is unknown since
the required spacing of the corridor speakers has not yet been deter-
mined.
A worst-case condition exists for a room located farthest from a
speaker. In this situation the room is located equally between two
speakers. Since each unit propagates sound to the room, the sound
pressure level outside of the room is higher than if there were only one
speaker. The sound pressure levelis not double that for a single speaker.
For equally spaced sounders add 3 dB to the level expected from a single
unit. Therefore:

L~z = 115 - 3 - 9 - C 5+ 3
Lp1 = 106 - C5.
184 Fire Technology

L ~ is the sound pressure level at the farthest point in a room. To

achieve the established goals L ~ must be 75 dBA. In this situation, with
the speaker located outside of the occupied space:

L~=Lp1-R + C2+ C6+ C7+ 11 dB

Here R is the average sound reduction index for the wall. C2 is a

function of the distance from the wall to the point of interest. C6 is a
function of the area of the room wall. C 7 is a function of the frequency of
the sound reaching the wall.
In this case, from data presented by Butler, Bower, and Kew2the sound
reduction index, R, for the wall is about 40 dB. This is based on incident
sound in the range of 100 to 3150 Hz. Sound attenuation through the
door is about 26 dB. The average sound reduction index, R, for the
combined door and wall is 34 dB. C2 is found to be -27 dB because there
are 6.5 meters from the center of the wall to the corner of the room. Since
the wall is 15 m 2, C6is +11.5 dB. If it is assumed that the sound reaching
the wall is a maximum at a frequency of 2000 Hertz, C~ = - 5 dB.
Therefore:

L ~ = (106 - C5) - 34 - 27 + 11.5 - 5 + 11 dB

L ~ = 6 2 . 5 - C5.

If there were no loss of sound pressure level between the speaker and
the room wall due to distance, C5 would be zero and L ~ would be 62.5
dBA. This shows that even if the two speakers were right outside the
room, the goal of 75 dBA in the room would not be met. In fact, the
resultant noise level in the room would be slightly less than the 65 dBA
required by British standards 5 to alert nonsleeping persons. The sound
level of 62.5 dBA would exceed the 55 dBA reported by Nober et al. 3 to
alert sleeping college-age persons in a quiet ambient setting.
To meet the goal of 75 dBAin the room, either the sound system or the
environment would have to be changed. Fire alarm speakers are
normally available with multiple power taps such as 4, 2, 1, 1/2, and 1/
4 watt. A single unit may allow choice of two or three different power
levels, which allows balancing of the system after installation.
If a 4-watt power input were used, this would be a doubling of the 2
watts originally tried in the calculation above. Because decibels are
logarithmic, a doubling of power results in a change of 3 dB in L W (10 ×
loglo 2 = 3). This alone would not be sufficient to meet the 75 dBA goal.
In addition, the higher sound pressure level in the immediate vicinity of
the speaker might be discomforting. If the fire alarm system were also
used for voice communication, a speaker tapped at 4 watts in a small
corridor might sound very distorted and be unintelligible.
Fire Alarm Audibility 185

It is also possible to change the sound pressure level in dBA by

changing the frequency of the source. In general, the higher the
frequency, the higher the attenuation as the sound waves pass through
a wall. Hence, a lower frequency would increase the sound pressure level
in the room. In the calculations above it was assumed that the predomi-
nant frequency of the source was 2000 Hertz. This resulted in a C~ of-5
dBA. According to the data supplied by Butler et al., ~ if this frequency
were 500 Hertz, C~ would be 0 dBA. This would increase the SPL in the
room by 5 dBA.
Changes could be made to the building design that would make it
possible to meet the design goal. For instance, the use of a lighter-weight
door or one without good edge sealing could increase sound transmission
to the room by as much as 12 dBA. However, changes such as this would
tend to defeat other goals such as fire resistance and resistance to smoke
spread. If the floor and ceiling were hard surfaces without carpeting or
tiles, C4 could be increased from -9 to 0 dB• Changes such as this would
probably be resisted for reasons other than fire protection.
The only remaining alternative is to provide speakers in each of the
rooms.

Scenario B
In this case a speaker in each room powered at only 1/4 watt will be
tried. The problem, then, is to select a speaker with a sound power
output that can meet the goal of 75 dB at the pillow.
L = ? at r = 3.05 meters (3.05 m is a commonly used reference point)
L w = L + 20 loglo r + 11 dB
L W = L + 20 loglo (3.05) + 11 dB
L w = L +21 dB.
Lp2 is the sound level at the bed. In this case, with the speaker in the
occupied space:
L n = L w + C I + C2
Here, C l is a correction for the distance of the sounder from an adjacent
surface. C2 is a correction for the distance from the speaker to the bed.
In this case the speaker is on the wall and close to the ceiling. Therefore,
from Butler, Bower, and Kew2 C 1 is +7 dB. C2 is -27 dB (approximately
6.5 meters from the speaker to the bed). Therefore:
L ~ = (L + 21) + 7 - 27 dBA
L~=L+I.
To g e t L n = 75 dBA, L must be at least 74 dB. The smallest and least
expensive fire alarm speaker available is a four-inch, paper cone
speaker. A typical speaker of this size and type, powered at 1/4 watt, has
a n L equal to 75 dB at 3.05 meters. 1,6 This speaker would meet the design
186 Fire Technology

goal in the room without even considering any sound contribution from
corridor m o u n t e d speakers.
For the corridor speakers in Scenario B, Lpl is the sound pressure level
at a point farthest from a speaker.
Lj,,=Lw+C3+C,+C ,.
Here C 3 a n d C 4 are the same as in Scenario A (-3 and - 9 dB
respectively). C 5 is a function of the spacing, which is to be determined.
If a single corridor speaker tapped at only 1/4 w a t t is used, with an L of
85 dB a t 3.05 meters: 1,e
L W = L + 20 loglo r + 11 dB
L w = 85 + 20 loglo (3.05) + 11 dB
L W = 106 dB.
Lp1 = 1 0 6 - 3 - 9 + C5
L p , = 9 4 + C 5.
The goal is to maintain a 65 dB sound pressure level in the corridors
(Lp1).
65 = 94 - C 5.
Therefore C 5 m u s t be - 2 9 dBA or more for LP1 to be 65 dBA or higher.
From Table V of Butler et al. 2 it is found that a distance of 50 meters
between source and target in the corridor could be exceeded and the 65
dBA goal still be met.

Cost Analysis
Scenario A
For comparison purposes assume t h a t sufficient changes could be
made to the building and alarm system to allow speakers to be mounted
in the corridor only at a spacing of 3 meters. A typical dormitory with
about 30 bedrooms per floor requires approximately 24 speakers per
f l o o r i n t h e corridors. In a building with seven floorsthis a m o u n t s t o 168
speakers. At two w a t t s per speaker, this would be 336 watts. This
requires three 125-watt power amplifiers at an installed cost of about
$1,400.00 each. This does not include other fixed costs such as control
equipment and detectors, which are the same for each of the scenarios.
Assume each corridor unit to be a speaker/light combination. The
average installed cost including backbox, wiring back to a control panel
on the first level, and conduit would total to about $135.00 per unit. The
total cost is then:
Total = 3 x $1,400.00 + 168 × $135.00
Total = $26,880.00.

Scenario B
In this case there are thirty, four-inch cone speakers per floor at an
Fire Alarm Audibility 187

average cost of $100.00 installed. Assume a total of four speaker/light

units per floor in the corridors. The calculations show that the system
goals are met with only one or two units in the corridors. However, the
halls maybe split by smoke doors or they maybe irregular in shape. Also,
system reliability is increased by using more than one unit.
Each bedroom speaker and corridor speaker is powered at 1/4 watt.
For seven floors this gives a total power requirement of 59.5 watts.
Therefore one 60-watt amplifier, at a unit cost of $1,125.00, is needed.
The total cost is then:
Total = $1,125.00 + 7 × 30 × $100.00 + 7 × 4 × $135.00
Total = $25,905.00.
Conclusions
The cost estimates of the systems show the relative costs of the
different scenarios, not the actual costs. The real costs of the systems are
affected by factors such as whether the building is new or existing: if
existing, the price is affected by the extent of other renovations. Also, the
estimates do not reflect the cost of other parts of the system. The balance
of the system includes such items as smoke and heat detectors, equip-
ment for elevator capture, and air-handler controls.
The relative costs of the two systems differ by only four percent. In a
building of this size and type such a small margin can not be considered
significant enough to conclude that one system is more economical than
the other.
The small difference in the costs of the two systems is because of the
additional cost of amplifiers needed to power the system that has only
corridor units. The total number of units (corridor + room) in Scenario
B is 70 more than in Scenario A. The reduced power requirement offsets
the added cost of their installation.
Scenario A has a higher equipment cost but a lower installation cost
than Scenario B. This means that the relative costs of the two systems
will be slightly sensitive to the type of equipment used and the cost of
installation labor. By changing the figures used in the cost estimates, it
can be shown that the variance is only a few percent and probably not
significant.
If the building were four stories or less in height, the difference in
relative cost reduces to about two percent. Again, this is not considered
to be a significant difference.
By increasing the size of the building to twelve stories, Scenario B
becomes about four percent less expensive than Scenario A. Above this
height, the combined use of room and corridor units becomes increas-
ingly economically attractive.
Changing the size of each floor has about the same effect as changing
the height of the building. Therefore, increasing the floor area makes
Scenario B more viable. A reduction in floor area and building height
188 Fire Technology
does not make the corridor-only system attractive unless the building is
only a few stories in height. Then, a voice system is probably not needed.
From an economics standpoint, a corridor-only horn/light system is
probably best, since the cost of these units is generally less than that of
speakers. Again, this assumes that sufficient changes could be made to
the building design to increase the level of sound penetrating the
corridor walls.
Obviously, if the sound loss from the corridor to the individual rooms
is less, Scenario A starts to become more appealing. This has the effect
of raising the height above which Scenario B becomes significantly less
expensive. However, changing construction features to reduce sound
loss may reduce the passive fire resistance of the structure below an
acceptable level.
There are other factors to consider when choosing between different
systems. In Scenario A the quantity of speakers in the corridors and the
high power levels driving each speaker (2 watts each) causes a great deal
of sound distortion. Voice messages may not be intelligible in the
bedrooms even though there is enough sound to wake a sleeping
occupant. Also, the high sound levels (over 106 dBA) in the corridors
approach uncomfortable levels.
It is clear from the discussions above that a system with room speakers
in conjunction with corridor units is the most desirable case. T h a t
system has the added advantage of eliminating most of the uncertainties
in its design. It is easier and more accurate to calculate sound levels at
a point in the same room as the sound source than it is to estimate sound
losses through composite walls.
This cost-benefit analysis shows that a fire alarm alerting system with
units in each office or bedroom canbe installed at about the same cost or
less than a corridor-only system. In addition, there is a higher confidence
level that the system with the sounders in each room will perform its
intended function, to awaken and alert sleeping occupants.

References
lGinn, K.B., Architectural Acoustics, Brual & Kjaer, Second Edition; 1978.
2Butler, Harold; Bower, Andrew; and Kew, John, Locating Fire Alarm Sounders for
Audibility, Building Services Research and Information Association, Bracknell, Berk-
shire, United Kingdom, RG12 4AH; 1981 (also available from the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161, order number PB82-175993).
3Nober, E.H., Pierce, H., Well, A., and Johnson, C.C., Waking Effectiveness of Household
Smoke and Fire Detection Devices, NBS-GCR-83-284,Washington, D.C., 20234, 1980.
4Kahn, M.J., Detection Times to Fire Related Stimuli by Sleeping Subjects, NBS-GCR-83-
435, Washington, D.C., 20234, 1983.
SBritish Standard Code of Practice CP3: Chapter IH: Part 2: BS11972.
6Davis, Carolyn, and Davis, Don, Sound System Engineering, Howard H. Sams and Co.,
Inc., 4300 West 62nd Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46268: 1975.
7Fire Control Instruments, Product Catalog. Newton, Massachusetts; 1986.