Top of door lipping

[Gorley81]

Came across a few nominals like this today. What's your thoughts?

[NickT]

Lipping’s to FD30 door edges would normally be between 6mm to 18mm thick.

Lipping’s to FD60 door edges would normally be between 6mm to 15mm thick.

Lipping’s to rebated meeting edges would normally be between 20mm to 25mm thick.

I would not consider dimensions outside of these sizes as compliant without specific test evidence.

[Mike North]

Given the fact that these doors contain Georgian wire, I suspect that they do not conform to the latest standards, however, unless there is a fault or defect with the door, they will do a job. I would suggest you mark them down as nominal fire doors and leave it up to the building owner as to if the wish to replace the door.  There is no expectation to replace something under Approved Document B unless there is a material alteration to the building

[Gorley81]

Thanks both. I did mark them as nominal, to be fair 99% of the doors in the sector I'm checking are nominal. I made a note that the lipping is excessive but they will still do the job but doesn't conform to current regs. 

When I first started I assumed that lipping couldn't be added to top of doors but have seen a few recently where lipping has been added to reduce header gaps. I can only assume that the company had a contractor a few years ago doing this in various premises.

I tend to recommend that the door is raised and lipping or drop seal added to base, is this correct or can you add to top?

 

[Neil Ashdown MAFDI]

As Nick T says above, the thickness of the hardwood lipping would very likely be outside the scope of the door's Assessment report for fire resistance were they carrying any evidence of performance.  You state that the door is a Nominal fire door which means in the opinion of the 'competent person' that the door has the attributes of a fire door but that there is no evidence of fire resistance performance.

Therefore, whilst it is likely that the door could be non-compliant to its original manufacturer's 'certification' there is no documentary evidence to confirm this in absolute terms.  I would advise the Responsible Person to risk assess in terms of how critical are the fire doors to life safety and building safety should they fail to provide their ultimate required fire resistance performance. 

Also, the gap between the door top edge and the underside of the door frame head appears to be excessive.  Generally, it should be between 2mm and 4mm so there could be an issue with cold smoke spread as well as fire resistance performance.

Also, the door-closer arm configuration is incorrect. The adjustable arm should be at 90 deg. to the door frame head with the tensioning-arm canted over accordingly. Remediating this will very likely improve the door-closer performance.

[Mike North]

The fact that the lipping on both leaves appear to be the same would suggest to me that that this was how the doors where manufactured.

The door we can see through the vision panel, does it have the same band at the head? and what about the bottom of the doors? 

 

[Gorley81]

On 17/01/2023 at 06:31, Neil Ashdown MAFDI said:

As Nick T says above, the thickness of the hardwood lipping would very likely be outside the scope of the door's Assessment report for fire resistance were they carrying any evidence of performance.  You state that the door is a Nominal fire door which means in the opinion of the 'competent person' that the door has the attributes of a fire door but that there is no evidence of fire resistance performance.

Therefore, whilst it is likely that the door could be non-compliant to its original manufacturer's 'certification' there is no documentary evidence to confirm this in absolute terms.  I would advise the Responsible Person to risk assess in terms of how critical are the fire doors to life safety and building safety should they fail to provide their ultimate required fire resistance performance. 

Also, the gap between the door top edge and the underside of the door frame head appears to be excessive.  Generally, it should be between 2mm and 4mm so there could be an issue with cold smoke spread as well as fire resistance performance.

Also, the door-closer arm configuration is incorrect. The adjustable arm should be at 90 deg. to the door frame head with the tensioning-arm canted over accordingly. Remediating this will very likely improve the door-closer performance.

You are right, I did fail the doors on a couple of issues. Mainly gaps as you spotted, the top was 5mm👍🏻. There were a fair few issues around the whole site.

On 17/01/2023 at 08:08, Mike North said:

The fact that the lipping on both leaves appear to be the same would suggest to me that that this was how the doors where manufactured.

The door we can see through the vision panel, does it have the same band at the head? and what about the bottom of the doors? 

 

That's what I thought at first but the lippings don't sit totally flush with face which makes me think it's not factory finished.

About 50% of the doors had lipping on top the rest had none. 

I think the main thing I'm asking is if adding lipping to the top of a nominal door is an acceptable method of reducing gaps? 

[Neil Ashdown MAFDI]

Yes, as you have picked up - the lipping must be flush with the face of the door.   So lipping may be replaced or added to the edges of the door but the hardwood must be of the correct dimensions, species, density and fitted with the correct adhesive.  This type of 'repair' is very likely to fall outside the scope of the fire resistance performance certification for the door and therefore the certification would become invalid. 

[Gorley81]

8 hours ago, Neil Ashdown MAFDI said:

Yes, as you have picked up - the lipping must be flush with the face of the door.   So lipping may be replaced or added to the edges of the door but the hardwood must be of the correct dimensions, species, density and fitted with the correct adhesive.  This type of 'repair' is very likely to fall outside the scope of the fire resistance performance certification for the door and therefore the certification would become invalid. 

Given the age of the doors and past facilities maintenance there is no record of any certification. In my view the best they can ever be is nominal but even that is questionable due to the thickness of the lipping.

Sorry to ask again but I tend to recommend that the door is raised and lipping or drop seal added to base, is this correct or can you add to top?

 

 

[Mike North]

It is always preferable to lip the bottom of a door as in a fire the most sever conditions can usually be found at the top opposite the hinges, this is one of the reasons why the certification mark is put here.

If you do lip the top of a make sure you take images of the certification before you modify the door.

[Neil Ashdown MAFDI]

Yep. In this context, better to lip the bottom rather than the top.