Safety & Security
Smoke & Fire Protection Feature
Disengaged door closers are becoming a massive problem within social housing and general-purpose flats
In most general needs blocks, each flat is designed to be a 60-minute
fire-resisting compartment, commonly, using a stay-put policy, with BS5839-6 detectors in the flats themselves, where, crucially, the highest risk of fire comes from. In the UK, BS 7273-4 requires flat entrance doors to be part of a critical
system. Tis means that any free-swing devices fitted to these doors need to be able to fail-safe on a fault signal from the fire alarm panel. In a majority of social housing premises, especially high-rise blocks of flats, there is no alarm and detection, other than the individual smoke detectors in the flats themselves. Maybe, if the ‘Responsible Person’ has had one installed, other detection
equipment such as sprinkler or AOV systems could be used to actuate the devices. Tis means that, assuming that relevant detectors are in the individual accommodations themselves, you could use these systems to actuate free swing devices on flat entrance doors. Perhaps a variation would be more ‘reasonably practicable’? Aſter all, Clause
a staggering 40% of closers were missing from flat entry doors in general needs accommodation. In an analysis of Grenfell survivors’ statements to the inquiry, it’s suggested that 56% of doors had missing self-closing devices. More recently, the devastating fire at Twin Parks, NYC, was allowed to quickly spread throughout the building, largely because the door to the flat where the fire originated did not close behind the residents as they evacuated. Isn’t it time, then, to start using free-swing devices (which bypass the
resistance/closing mechanism until they receive a suitable signal from a fire alarm) on flat entry doors as standard? Tere’s a massive risk of doors being made non-compliant purely because of how heavy they are. But to use these types of products, we need a way to actuate the device so that it can close the door in an emergency. How do we do that when there is no fire alarm?
6 of BS 7273-4 allows for variations to the recommendations of the standard, subject to a suitable risk assessment, and approval from all interested parties (the Responsible Person, the resident, the Premises Manager, the Installer, the local fire authority etc), and requires the variation to be noted on the commissioning certificate. Simple enough, right? Te problem is, even though many more people are embracing variations where they offer a viable solution, some remain scared of thinking that far outside of the box. In reality, finding a compliant solution for this problem can be tricky, with BS 7273-4 already known for being an awkward standard to comply with. Te issue of how to effectively deal with the problem of disengaged and tampered closers is a head-scratcher, for sure.
Pete Davies is business development manager at Fireco
40 | HMMOctober/November 2024 |
www.housingmmonline.co.uk
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
