Neil Ashdown MAFDI

There are different devices used to provide protection against spread of fire and smoke. Sprinklers and doors are two of them and these devices should be used towards a holistic approach to dealing with fire risk. Clearly, a building with a sprinkler system and fire doors should provide a higher level of protection than a building with fire doors alone. The Responsible Person should carry out a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment to include the risk to relevant persons at the building and factor in the protection where it is provided by the sprinklers, the fire doors and other devices appropriately. No doubt, using this holistic approach, both sprinklers and fire doors together will form a large part of the fire protections at the building. Both should then be checked and maintained in good condition as appropriate to the fire strategy to provide safety in a fire at the building. It should be clear from the fire risk assessment to what extent the devices provide protection and therefore what is required from the maintenance regime.

As far as I am aware, there were no standard scheme markings, such as BM TRADA Q Mark or BWF-Certifire. But the manufacturer may have marked the door for identification purposes. They were called fire-check doors in those days. This may have applied at the time? https://www.scribd.com/document/449684907/BS-476-1-pdf

Q) I don't see an easy way to determine the gap and seal between the frame and wall when it's painted and finished? The inspector would just use their judgement? A) Remove the architraves or trims where present. Unless of course the door frame can be seen to be an intimate fit with the wall.

Q) What can determine a frame has to be changed? A) Does it meet the specific requirements stated in the certificate of approval / installation instructions for the particular fire door leaf you intend to fit and is the linear gap between the door frame and surrounding wall correctly sized and sealed?

So long as you can demonstrate that the fire door assembly you install has all the documentary evidence of product fire and smoke performance and that the installation work can be confirmed as meeting the relevant standards and regulations, it would be reasonable to expect the management company to be satisfied. It may be prudent to consult them before you proceed. Also, trying to fit a new fire door leaf to an existing door frame is challenging due to the usually very limited allowances permitted when trimming the edges of the door. Personally, I would avoid using basic off the shelf fire door leaves for flat entrance doors and would select a higher quality door with good quality hardware and seals for reliable self-closing performance and high security. Replacing a fire door is notifiable works, so I would also consult the Local Building Control office to check what compliance requirements are required to be met.

It will be necessary to contact the code-lock manufacturer or supplier and examine their specific evidence of fire resistance performance for their product when fitted to a fire door of the type that you intend to use. Generally, that will mean the door must have a solid timber-based core throughout, rather than tubeboard.

Contact ASDMA to find a supplier or manufacturer https://asdma.com/knowledge-centre/

The issue is not so much that the door leaf is not a close fit to the door frame rebate stop. Rather, is the door leaf thickness wholly contained within the door frame rebate or does it stand proud on the 'pull-side'? Some doors have no stated tolerance within their certification document for this issue, others have up to 1mm generally.

Consult Building Regulations. In England & Wales its https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-approved-document-b

Bear in mind the maximum gap should be measured at the point where the intumescent seal is located (eg. double-action doors with rounded meeting edges). Where a fire door manufacturer's technical data fails to address the matter of a 'leading-edge' - consult their technical department.

So long as the 're-lipping work' is done to a 'joinery' standard (the joint should be difficult to detect) this should be acceptable as a suitable repair.

Lever handles are more durable when fitted with back to back fixings through the door, rather than only face fixings. A fire door frame can, in theory, be fixed straight to a suitable wall but in reality packers would likely be necessary for the door to positioned correctly. Hardwood behind the door frame, as a subframe, could be used. A shadow gap is created for aesthetic reasons. Therefore, it would not be filled.

It depends on the condition of the floor. You could fit a static flexible seal to one face of the door leaf to seal the bottom edge but the seal must not impede the self-closing action of the door.

The installer should consult the certification data sheet / technical manual for that particular make and type of door leaf before cutting the aperture and fitting the fire & smoke rated letter plate. Where the relevant document does not permit such a letter plate, then the door manufacturer technical dept should be consulted. Where a letter plate has been fitted to a door where one is not permitted - this would be a 'non-compliance'. It would not become a Nominal Fire Door.

The door blank manufacturer / supplier will be able to provide you or your door fabricator with the 'Technical Manuals' and field of application reports detailing the permitted dimensions, permitted veneer thickness, lipping requirements, seal requirements, ironmongery/hardware requirements and installation tolerances. For example: https://falcon-timber.com/downloads/