MAINTENANCE & SERVICING


Managing fire damper maintenance: a risk-based approach


Fire damper safety compliance is expensive but an essential service. Andrew Steel, managing director of independent air hygiene specialist Airmec, explores whether a risk-based approach can help you to manage costs without compromising on safety


M


anaging ventilation systems for hygiene and energy efficiency and legal compliance usually involves mandatory fire damper testing inspection and maintenance. However, chequered maintenance histories are, in my experience, all too common and stretched budgets may have pushed even mandatory actions down the list of priorities. Often issues stem from incorrect original installation techniques years ago making fire dampers inaccessible for inspection and testing. Or perhaps the use and configuration of a building have changed over the years, leading to building managers losing track of where the dampers even are? None of these ‘excuses’ would stand up in a court of law following a disaster. Building managers do need to get on top of this, but where do you start to fix things? Fortunately, there is a roadmap based on intelligent and diligent application of a risk-based approach to compliance management that will satisfy duty holders and budget holders alike. The first step towards resolution is to know your building, which means having a comprehensive asset register that gives you a complete picture. Then you can understand, assess, and manage risk pragmatically with a focus on keeping people safe, not just box ticking. You will almost certainly need to work with a specialist service provider but remember that you will still hold the ultimate responsibility as a duty holder or responsible person. Choosing the right partner is essential.


Why now?


Poor compliance of fire damper maintenance has been a concern of mine for many years, but it became a mainstream issue when alarm bells were rung about faulty fire damper installation practices, where contractors had used the wrong fixings. The campaign was led by the Building Engineering Services Association (BESA), and it has now resulted in new best practice guidance from BESA on installation of new systems bad management of legacy systems. Briefly the issue was that use of self-drilling


screws for joining duct sections because they made installation quicker, cheaper, and easier. Remember,


18 April 2026


Above: Lack of cross checks between trades and designers


fire dampers themselves are not that expensive, the main cost is in installing them, so this was an economy that may have benefitted installers but certainly has not helped building users. Danger arises because ductwork should be


connected to fire using fixings and connectors with low melting points. This creates a break-away joint, reducing the risk of a fire damper being pulled away from the fire compartmentation if in the ductwork collapses or expands if a fire breaks out. Quick-install, self-drilling screws do not melt at low enough temperatures to achieve this and using them has actually been against guidance going back to 2010. Where they have been used, either they must be replaced, or the risk must be mitigated on some other way and the BESA campaign made clear that that all establishments had a duty to investigate their own installations urgently. Simply replacing the fixings isn’t as easy as it sounds. It can mean starting from scratch and working out where the dampers even are and then installing the inspection hatches that, according to guidance, should already have been in place.


The access issue


Even before the issue with screw fixing was highlighted there was already another huge elephant in the room. While safety regulations require that fire dampers are inspected and tested at least annually, the sheer difficulty/impossibility of getting to them meant that was not happening in many cases.


Above: Close up of fire damper flaps


www.heatingandventilating.net


Above left: Airmec MD Andrew Steel


There are often not enough access hatches. This is surprising because ventilation ductwork access hatches are after all fairly basic and would have been relatively inexpensive and easy to fit when ducting was first installed. In contrast, retrofitting access hatches in a working building starts to add significant cost and disruption. So, the inspection and testing backlog has been building for years and the current imperative to address it urgently adds unwelcome pressure to severely pressed budgets. Costs can escalate further due to lack of co-


ordination between trades. In new installations and old alike, Airmec teams often find that access hatches have become impossible to use because other pipes or electrical cable trays have been fitted later and block them. This lack of co-ordination is astonishing. So much for the digital record/golden thread of information which should include all new installation or modifications. Installing new hatches and access arrangements


from scratch, can be prohibitively expensive and may not even be possible for all dampers. An alternative approach is to apply risk-based mitigation. Doing nothing is not an option!


Risk-based mitigation


Risk-based facilities management is not a new concept. It is a strategic approach that prioritises maintenance and resource allocation based on the potential risks associated with different assets so that statutory regulations to be applied sensibly and pragmatically. By understanding the likelihood and consequences of potential failures, facilities managers can make informed decisions about where to focus their


DOWNLOAD THE HVR APP NOW


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