Upgrading non fire rated doors to achieve 30 minutes compliance

[Bobbins]

[Envirograf does not claim that it's product will upgrade every type of door. e.g. panel in doors should be minimum 6 mm thick.
Does everybody have access to it's publication on the product range and what it claims it can and cannot do?
[/quote]

Having looked at the various products they claim to have fire test evidence for, I estimate they would need around 9 separate tests, just to cover one ‘donor’ door specification

 If they needed to cover a host of other specifications I would suggest the testing would run in to the high teens if not more.

My best guess is they have designed a test regime that they feel gives them confidence in total coverage. What they think gives them total coverage and what others might think is total coverage will not be the same. I can not for one second believe they have a report from a notified test lab that will cover them for all end use applications.

I think they may have some test evidence but what it covers is proving very difficult to obtain.

The new FSE magazine has a couple of articles on fire doors and in one it states clearly when talking about upgrade products ‘not all will be suitable for all the different types of doorsets to be found in a building’

So how does a RP know if their door is suitable for an upgrade? They ask the people selling them the upgrading product.

It reminds me of those health potions that are good for all ills; indigestion, arthritis, headaches, constipation, sex drive, warts…………………………………………..fire door upgrades and the list goes on and on.

If it was my door I would want them to convince me with test evidence; and that isn’t forthcoming. The article goes on to say ‘upgrading of doorsets must include all aspects of design including the following;’

Leaf construction
Frame
Hardware
Intumescent seals
Glazing door gaps
Installation.   

Even this magic product won’t do all of that; I am sure it does have its use and could given the right application be effective.

However I believe they are selling a product that they know will be incorrectly applied to doors, they know it is not going to upgrade everything it is being put on and they are not concerning themselves with the false sense of security the door owner will have after they have spent good money on upgrading.

Responsibility Accountability and Traceability are not words I would apply to

 ‘DR GOODS intumescent potion number 9’

[Auntie LIn]

Can I just throw in my three pennyworth?   Applied coatings to give "fire protection" are only as good as they are complete.   How long does the paintwork on a door remain undamaged?

[Davo]

Found this, might add to the debate

http://www.meansofescape.com/industry-news/news107.aspx


davo

[Mr. P]

Hello Auntie LIn, back from your hols? Was involved with similar scenario in property which is watched over by heritage & listed grades people.  They ended up using envirograph. Noted in RA concerns/points like you point out as a management risk action to keep aware of any degradation etc.  Hoping to go for a re-visit as an aside to see for myself how it's fairing.

[kurnal]

The means of escape article is ok so far as it goes.
But so very often we have to take a pragmatic view for existing doors and frames that need to be improved but cannot be replaced, especially in heritage buildings. Very often its a case of doing what you can to improve the door towards a fire resisting standard and using experience, limited test data to go as far as you reasonably can. You can never estimate how an upgraded door would fare in a fire test, and does it really matter whether its 25mins or 35 mins in the scheme of things- you would always look at additional risk control measures in other areas because you know you have not got a BS  476 part 22 door.

[Auntie LIn]

Hi to you Mr P - hols? hols??? what are they?? (hoping to find out in a couple of weeks time).

Hello Kurnal too - glad to see you're keeping things going in my absence.

This whole issue is a real can of worms.   You can start out by looking at how well the leaf fits within the frame.   If it's a good fit then it might be worth installing intumescent & smoke seals so that whatever the construction of the door, it will achieve its maximum potential performance.   This is unlikely to be the full FD30S, but is better than fitting a new, supposedly 30 minute, leaf badly into the existing frame.   You could look at the existing door, to see if there's any clue as to how it's been built.   For example, can you see strips of timber at the head of the door (get your handbag mirror out and hold it above the leaf head to see - sorry, forgot chaps don't carry handbag mirrors - you'll have to use a dental mirror).   If you can't see anything there, try taking the latch out.   If you find egg-crate construction anywhere - demand a new door!   

I have very real concerns about anything that is sold for application to the faces of doors.   I don't like paints for reasons given before and don't like 'papers' any better.   The papers that I've seen have looked and felt like blotting paper - if, like me you're old enough to remember writing with a quill pen and getting inky fingers.   I have found two problems with the papers.   First is that they damage very easily, so get scraped or scuffed.   Second is that unless the person applying them knows what they are doing, bubbles appear on the surface, like your home wallpaper if you don't smooth it down properly.

Trouble with upgrading is that there's no 'one size fits all' solution.   You really do have to look at each individual door and tailor-make the solution.   This renders upgrading a very expensive exercise.

[jasper]

I know this has been tested to BS 476 but has it passed? a lot of companies state it has been tested but when asked for evidence stragely I get no response

[Auntie LIn]

You're right to beware of the statement "all our products have been fully tested to BS......"   Ask the questions "is the BS quoted the one that is appropriate to the product in question?"  "has the product been tested in the way in which it is planned to be used?" and perhaps most crucially "did it pass?"   All the other ol' cynics out there will, like me, not be in the slightest bit surprised to know that many of the claims made are based on things like indicative testing.   My mind goes back to someone producing something for use with ceilings where the product was tested on a 1m x 1m indicative sample and was being sold for use on a 4m x 5m ceiling!

[Hightower]

I came across a report the other day from an asbestos surveyor stating he suspected fire doors he had viewed contained asbestos and he needed to do an obtrusive test to clarify.  Can anyone tell me if asbestos is commonly found in older style fire doors?

My concern is that the doors looked like solid wooden doors that would be suitable for upgrade with intumescent strips, cause if the chippy had gone ahead and done it and there was asbestos the implications could of been nasty all round.

[kurnal]

It was common practice in the 50s and 60s to line doors with asbestos sheeting such as asbestolux to improve their fire performance, sometimes this was done by screwing a sheet of board across the entire side of the door, sometimes it was more subtle where if the stiles and rails were substantial enough in their own right (44mm) then the panel beadings would be removed, a small sheet of asbestolux placed over the thin panel and the beadings replaced, probably trimmed to the thickness of the board. I still have an old data sheet issued by the fire service with instructions how to upgrade a door. I have a feeling that an old version of BS459 covered fire doors in those days but memory getting hazy now.  

Did the upgrade work? We will never know but the weight of all that asbestolux pulled many a door off its hinges and warped many others.

[Tom Sutton]

After the scare about white and blue asbestos they also used Supalux a non-combustible calcium silicate board which looks similar the asbestolux.

[Midland Retty]

After the scare about white and blue asbestos they also used Supalux a non-combustible calcium silicate board which looks similar the asbestolux.

As TW correctly states, both Asbestolux / superlux look very similar.

As an aside to your question the way to tell them apart is fairly simple. Superlux has small crystal-like shards within it (calcium sillicate) which "sparkle", whereas Asbestolux does not.

The close silimarities can cause confusion and uneccessary alarm.

To get back to the main question it is not unheard of to find fire doors containing asbestos in older buildings, infact if I recall correctly the practice Kurnal mentioned continued into the 1970s.

[Tom Sutton]

To get back to the main question it is not unheard of to find fire doors containing asbestos in older buildings, in fact if I recall correctly the practice Kurnal mentioned continued into the 1970s.

It was about 1975 when they started using Supalux in stead of Asbestolux and many thousands of doors must have been upgraded by then.

I agree with Kurnal the British Standard was BS459-3 if memory serves me right but now-days I do have trouble remembering my name so treat that with caution.

[Hightower]

Thanks chaps for your replies with respect to asbestos in doors.

I can't say that I've ever read anything in a report that states before considering upgrading doors to have intumescent strips in them, the door should be confirmed that it does not contain asbestos?

I am supposing that if any suspicion exists of a door being of the 70's age then a test for asbestos should be carried out first?

[Davo]

Hightower

Most panels will have several coats of paint on them making it difficult to tell.
I seem to think that the asbestolux panels were thicker, perhaps those more senior could confirm.
Local Authorities and emergency services used them a lot

If the panel is on business premises ask for their Asbestos Survey (legal requirement)


davo