All Activity

I haven't yet come across a timber fire door that permits opposing intumescent seals, in the meeting edges of double leaves they would be offset rather than directly opposed. Except for doors with edge protectors that is. You could try https://www.ifsa.org.uk/

It used to be in the guidance for very small premises, but has been removed in recent years and now the guidance only refers to proper emergency lighting. Your Fire Risk Assessment may accept such an approach but it would need to justify why it deviates from the guidance & remains acceptable. The premises do sound bigger than that covered by the old guide (aimed at small single storey premises like a lock up shop) It would be a reasonable short term measure whilst the proper lighting is installed.

It sounds the same as a set of shelving, just recessed as a built in cupboard - sounds a little overkill I'd agree!

I work at a wholesale company that has a warehouse on the ground floor and offices on the first floor. My question is whether having a number of torches hanging on the walls around the building that are inspected weekly/monthly would pass as suitable emergency lighting from a legal point of view? Thanks

Hi, do we have any specific guidance regarding opposing intumescent seals in door frames and door leafs (nominal doors) as far as I am aware this is fail and requires replacement. Also with regard to opposing seals in meeting edges on a single acting double door set, some door manufacturers allow opposing seals according to the certification, but I am wondering about nominal doors

Hi Anthony - its just a store cupboard, floor to ceiling with shelving, but I'd say the foot print is approx 3ft x 5ft? (I'm not in the school to measure - going on memory!)

Thanks. Good to know about the Health & Safety (Safety Signs & Signals) Regulations 1996

As the part 6 inside the flat is local to that flat it's only for the life safety of the flat occupier and the flat is a private dwelling then it's out of the scope of the Fire Safety Order and the liability of the RP (unless there is some contractual maintenance responsibility) so it shouldn't be a concern - only facilities in a flat to protect the other parts of the building (such as heats & sounders off a common system) would be the RP's responsibility and liability if not maintained.

Strictly speaking if it's text only it doesn't meet the requirements for fire safety signs under the Health & Safety (Safety Signs & Signals) Regulations 1996 as it does not include a pictogram (symbol/picture) - however I take a balanced approach to this based on the potential number & type of users of the exit as the most common symbol you see is just a white tick on green which adds nothing to understanding how to use the door. If the exit has the required level of emergency lighting adjacent it won't need to be photoluminescent as it would have suitable external lighting (plus photoluminescent signage isn't very effective unless externally lit continuously to keep the material 'charged' so it has the required brightness and duration of luminescence to be any use when the power fails)

As Neil says! Did the FRA pick up the common area domestic smokes that the official guidance says aren't suitable and shouldn't be there as they confuse.

Is it a full room or more a big cupboard? I do a lot of schools work and the doors required to be fire doors is often less than you think. I'd need to see the building to be definitive but it's certainly not automatic.

Why does the FRA say you need one? A 2014 conversion in accordance with Building Regulations guidance (Approved Document B) which yours sounds like operates stay put and absolutely does not need a site wide linked fire alarm or an evacuation strategy. The only reason you would need to change is if the external wall construction or internal compartmentation/fire stopping has been found to be defective (possibly also compartmentation between shops & flats substandard as well being a reason) and not readily rectifiable - full evacuation & alarms is considered a last resort on all current guidance. Unfortunately it's sadly common for post 2000 builds and conversions to have legacy fire safety defects that the ineffective building control approval process has not picked up leading to issues like this when they come to light (Grenfell Tower being the ultimate example as it's refurbishment had a completion certificate as meeting Building Regs) If no particular reason is detailed then you need a new, better, FRA and to seek a determination of your enforcement notice by the Secretary of State (which fire services do loose, they don't win them all by a very long chalk!) to see if your solution (i.e. the status quo as per building regs guidance) is acceptable. There must be some reason they are going down this route

Yes we have already been all over dhfonline, nothing specifically about metal door sets.

My advice would be to: Establish that the doors are solid core and in suitable condition, record your findings. Add suitable BSEN1154 compliant self-closing devices and make sure all doors self-close completely, reliably, smoothly and without risk of causing a 'trapping injury' - of fingers etc. Add intumescent fire seals and perimeter smoke seals. Make sure the door to frame gaps are between 2mm and 4mm (within reason). Replace the existing letter plate with a fire and smoke rated item and attend to the door threshold so that it will restrict the passage of smoke in a fire. UK Government advice about fire doors can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance

I would advise Fire Exit Keep Clear signs on both sides. The existing PUSH sign should be sufficient unless the Fire Risk Assessment requires illuminated signs.

Hush pads might affect the smoke seals fitted to fire doors. Its not your door so this might not be any use to you but there are smoke seals that soften the closing action of the door - such as these:

https://www.dhfonline.org.uk/site-search.htm?q=fire+doors&searchSubmit=Search

Hi, this is interesting and helpful. In our case we live in a very solid 1930s building of local ‘architectural interest’. It’s a purpose-built concrete & brick block below 11 metres. And the stairs servicing the building are broad & clutter-free, with very little combustible material present. photo However, the assessment implied the doors to individual flats (very attractive & solid oak - photo) are probably not 30mins-fire resistant. This aspect was deemed a ‘Medium Risk’. We as residents very much wish to keep these doors as they are very much part of the architectural character/heritage of our building. What might we do to retain them ?

If a final exit door in a public area has a push bad engraved 'push', does it still need a 'push pad to open' sign? I initially would've thought not, but thinking about hours of darkness or during emergency lighting cover, this probably wouldn't be visible/clear. Do we also need 'fire exit, keep clear' signs on the back of these doors if it's all clear glass?

We live above a 3 bed flat that currently has students living in. Since they moved in we have had issues with hearing each of their firedoors shutting. I contacted their letting agents who came out and adjusted the fire doors to make them close softer. However, this has not helped and the noise is still persistent. I have fed this back to the letting agents however they have stated there's nothing else they can do, the doors need to shut to meet regulations. Is there anything else I can suggest to the letting agents to prevent or decrease this noise? I've looked at hush pads on Amazon but fear that they would say this would not meet fire regs? Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks.

We live about a 3 bed flat that currently has students living in. Since they moved in we have had issues with hearing each of their firedoors shutting. I contacted their letting agents who came out and adjusted the fire doors to make them close softer. However, this has not helped and the noise is still persistent. I have fed this back to the letting agents however they have stated there's nothing else they can do, the doors need to shut to meet regulations. Is there anything else I can suggest to the letting agents to prevent or decrease this noise? I've looked at hush pads on Amazon but fear that they would say this would not meet fire regs? Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks.

Great thanks for the clarity. Fire safety can be so woolly some times and hard to interpret. I do find the monthly user test on a grade D system (not ARC) a strange one as most occupiers are not going to carry this out and you feel that if you had a fatal incident which was found to be due to the resident not having an early warning due to a faulty detector, that coroner would Find the RP responsible. But you could argue is this any different to other properties in social housing.

Hi AnthonyB, thanks for the question - no there is not. Just general teaching stuff!

hi. some advice please we manage a block of apartments in the merseyside area. its a 4 storey block. shops to the ground floor and 30 apartments to the 3 upper floors. its an office to resi conversion and was completed in 2014, with building reg approval obviously. all concrete floors were existing and new party walls are double stud, so whilst its a conversion it appears like a new build. there are smoke vents to 2 stairs but no linked fire alarm, just mains smoke alarms to each individual flat we have had a FB visit and they have demanded a linked fire alarm our original FRA never asked for this, asessor retired and new report done after visit and they also advise linked alarm, not sure if they are rolling over with what FB asked for how can a building be building reg compliant but then FB can seemingly on a whim ask for something different ? the architect is adamant its not needed do we have a right to challenge FB , or if the fra says it are we stuck with it. or seek a new fra and challenge ? its a frustrating situation.... any guidance would be welcomed thanks

The way the NFCC guide is written puts the clause in 94.16 firmly in the section regarding the communal BS5839-1 system, which in some sheltered housing blocks does extend into the flats with detection in addition to or instead of a domestic BS5839-6 smoke/heat alarm system. If that communal system is linked to an Alarm Receiving Centre AND the fire strategy relies on that link for the life safety of occupiers (which it might if for some reason the flat domestic systems are NOT linked individually to telecare/warden/Tunstall systems which is sometimes the case) then I would interpret this as meaning you would then need to weekly test a device in a flat in rotation & see that the ARC is notified (although in most cases the ARC would still only get a simple 'fire' signal from the main address not identifying the flat). If it doesn't then this clause does not apply. The domestic Grade D system is dealt with in a separate section where the usual requirement of monthly user test applies (which itself would lead to the flat's local telecare link, where fitted, also being tested) with an annual service being required only where a telecare link exists.