Feature
“Similarly, EN 1634-1 is a European standard that evaluates the fire resistance of building components - including fire doorsets - and is based on harmonized testing procedures across Europe. While EN 1634-1 follows a similar testing method to that of BS 476, and has also been adopted within British Standards, there are slight differences between the two. Although both test cycles follow the same time and temperature, EN 1634-1 positions the neutral plane 500mm from floor level and has variation in its temperature control methods, meaning the furnace is driven harder and the door is more susceptible to warping. As such, the method more closely replicates real-life fire conditions and for this reason, EN 1634-1 is considered a more reliable standard.
“In any case, a transition from BS 476 to EN 1634-1 has the potential to send significant shock waves through the entire supply chain, and not only for the architectural ironmongery industry. There are no disputes with the testing process itself, but in moving to European standards, UK bodies won’t be able to carry out assessments and aren’t permitted to CE mark, and as a result, we will be withdrawing a long list of fire safety products from the market. By not allowing assessment through approved specialist authorities that have been operating for years, we could be facing huge delays to the industry and its projects, with an immediate influx of products forming a backlog in fire-resistance testing.
As part of an ongoing consultation programme, the proposed change to EN 1634-1 remains hanging in the balance, with many stakeholders awaiting further statements to be made. On the future of fire door hardware testing, Daniel continues: “Right now, the UK government appears to have paused for thought. Such is the importance of product testing in construction, the implementation of this proposal must be carefully considered, and the industry remains optimistic that each set of concerns will be addressed accordingly - including everything from resources and time to environment itself.
costs and the safety of the built
“Another area to consider is heritage projects for example. Thousands of heritage buildings reside in the UK, and many rely on bespoke door assemblies which can be certified through assessments in the current regulations. For buildings of this type, there is no one size fits all solution. Yet, with the new European standards, each door assembly would need to remain the same otherwise it would likely be too costly for bespoke testing. With such a significance being put on like for like products, the newly proposed arrangement could reduce design options significantly as a result. There is an even bigger issue for composite doors, where there is no extended application, meaning you can only use exactly what has been tested in every way on previous tests.
“BS 476 isn’t recognised under CE or UKCA marking and any manufacturer currently testing to it as a standard would be obliged to re-test their products, causing sizeable disruption - and not to mention costs. Simply put, there would be a void to fill and seemingly not enough capacity within the regulated testing organisations for it to remain successful. With run-in time so essential to the way the industry operates, we must question whether it’s a viable solution or if we would be adding to a problem?”
“There’s no doubt that fire safety will always remain a key concern when it comes to building design and construction and evidently there is a need to continue improving clarity and consistency across the board. Those values must also apply with legislative updates and if the proposed shift to EN 1634-1 is to go ahead, it should only be done so after sufficient time and consideration is taken. Perhaps, with the UK outside of the EU, it’s wholly possible to approach these changes with a practical hybrid system? Only time will tell, but as standards continue to evolve, the industry must anticipate change.”
References
1:
https://www.thenbs.com/PublicationIndex/documents/details?Pub=BSI&DocID=13548 2:
https://www.thenbs.com/PublicationIndex/documents/details?Pub=NSAI&DocID=306013
3:
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/sprinklers-in-care-homes-removal-of-national-classes-and-staircases-in-residential-buildings/ 4:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-approved-document-b 5:
https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3021
6:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-act-2021 fmuk 37
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
