Fire Extinguisher & Intumescent seals

[graham47]

I have just come off the phone to a customer who runs a hotel. He has informed me that he has heard that some business have been advised to remove their fire extinguishers by the FD, as they should only be interested in evacuation as opposed to fighting any potential fire.  Has anyone else heard of this?

I would also be interested to know if anyone can tell me if intumescent seals would be effective once painted over?

Look forward to receiving any info/advice.

[nearlythere]

I have just come off the phone to a customer who runs a hotel. He has informed me that he has heard that some business have been advised to remove their fire extinguishers by the FD, as they should only be interested in evacuation as opposed to fighting any potential fire.  Has anyone else heard of this?

I would also be interested to know if anyone can tell me if intumescent seals would be effective once painted over?

Look forward to receiving any info/advice.

Yes. If the emergency action plan states that no one is to tackle a fire but to evacuate then there is no need for extinguishers really. Extinguishers are not there for the means of escape.

Yes, I remember attending a presentation by a manufacturer who stated that intumescent strips are still effective if painted over.

[Tom Sutton]

Intumescent seals can be over painted without interfering with their properties though any smoke seal blades or brushes should be unpainted. There will come a point, however, where sufficient coats of paint could inhibit the activation of the intumescent material. This is currently thought to be in the region of 2-3mm thickness of paint. Please refer to fixing and installation instructions.

[EricRobson]

Should this really be in the USAR Training section?  If it is put in the correct section you may get more replies.

[Chris Houston]

Should this really be in the USAR Training section?  If it is put in the correct section you may get more replies.

Correct. Done.

[Davo]

graham 47/TW

I raised this with IFSA (Intumescent Fire Seals Association) some years ago and they told me up to five coats of paint is OK.
My post is still on their website IFSA.org.uk
As TW says brushes etc must never be painted if they are to function 100%

davo

[Tom Sutton]

Source  BS 8214:1990 Code of practice for Fire door assemblies with non-metallic leaves

Clause26.  Decoration

Unglazed areas of any fire door leaves are generally not required to provide a specific surface spread of flame requirement and may therefore be decorated as desired. There is no evidence to suggest that over painting of heat activated seals has any detrimental effect on the ability of the seals to perform efficiently. There are some benefits in over painting the seals as they are less likely to absorb atmospheric moisture. However, there are limits on how much paint can be applied without there being a risk of the seal being rendered inoperative. It is recommended that over painting be limited to a maximum of five coats of conventional oil bound paint or varnish. When preparing a frame for redecoration, the use of heat or chemical strippers should be avoided if intumescent seals are incorporated. If seals are damaged by either of these processes, they should be replaced in accordance with clause 21. If glazing beads have been painted with intumescent paint, it is essential that they should be repainted with a similar paint.

5 coats of oil paint or varnish times average thickness of a coat of paint 0.5mm with a tolerance of 0.1mm for each coat equals 2mm to 3mm.

[PhilB]

If the emergency action plan states that no one is to tackle a fire but to evacuate then there is no need for extinguishers really. Extinguishers are not there for the means of escape.

Yes, I remember attending a presentation by a manufacturer who stated that intumescent strips are still effective if painted over.

Really Nearlythere? How does the RP comply with his duty to take reasonable measures to mitigate the effects of fire if he has no extinguishers. Or to look at it another way, how would he demonstrate to a Court that he had taken all reasonable precautions and exercised all due dilligence?

I agree that this used to be the case in the bad old days of the WP Regs when all that was required was to evacuate, but don't the general fire precautions go further these days?

[Mr. P]

My tag on this is that extinguishers are for 2 things; put the fire out (if trained etc.etc.) but, most importantly to get you out of a trapped position.

[PhilB]

My tag on this is that extinguishers are for 2 things; put the fire out (if trained etc.etc.) but, most importantly to get you out of a trapped position.

I would suggest that if the risk assessment concludes that the safety of relevant persons depends on the presence of an extinguisher to enable them to fight their way out, a reveiw of the means of escape and emergency plan may be in order.

[Clevelandfire]

My tag on this is that extinguishers are for 2 things; put the fire out (if trained etc.etc.) but, most importantly to get you out of a trapped position.

I would suggest that if the risk assessment concludes that the safety of relevant persons depends on the presence of an extinguisher to enable them to fight their way out, a reveiw of the means of escape and emergency plan may be in order.

Yes!

If youre reliant on extinguishers to escape then im afraid something is seriously wrong.

No you cant not have fire extinguishers the RR(FS)O is categoric in saying they must be provided. Ther are no fire services im aware of saying you can remove extinguishers.

[FSO]

My tag on this is that extinguishers are for 2 things; put the fire out (if trained etc.etc.) but, most importantly to get you out of a trapped position.

Sounds like you have been on a large extinguisher manufacturers training course.

Many people have this misguided view.

If this is the case, why are extinguishers generally by exits? (not saying that is correct though)

[Big T]

I suppose thats one way of not providing staff with training, just remove all of the extinguishers in building.

Sounds farsical to be honest. Why would the FD encourage the removal of extinguishers? Is S/he moonlighting as a fire extinguisher removal company?

If I have to install extinguishers in shelterd blocks of flats when nobody in the building works for me (BS5588 pt 1) then the owners of a hotel definately need them.

[The Reiver]

My tag on this is that extinguishers are for 2 things; put the fire out (if trained etc.etc.) but, most importantly to get you out of a trapped position.

Sounds like you have been on a large extinguisher manufacturers training course.

Many people have this misguided view.

If this is the case, why are extinguishers generally by exits? (not saying that is correct though)

OK FSO, you've got my interest with that quote !

If (as stated by Mr. P and refuted by your good self) a HPE is not for putting a fire out or to assist in the safe evacuation of persons from a building then "re-guide" me as to what its' purpose is please. I am intrigued as I am also one of the "Misguided Many".

The "extinguishers at exits" comes from the days of the fire certificate when those interested (and so obviously qualified) parties drew up the building plan and placed their little triangles there. You will recall that this plan was then judged akin to a sacred tablet and placed within the arc of the covenant (or fire certificate folder) never to be questioned, judged or altered unless a change of use should rear its head. you could add to it (with permission) should extra "specific risk" be noted. But you could never subtract from it should "blatant stupidity" be noted.

[Midland Retty]

Hi Reiver

Fire Extinguishers should be provided to mitigate the effects of fire (This is a requirement of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005)

They should not however be used to secure a means of escape - if you are reliant on using a fire extinguisher to aid your escape then I would be extremely concerned.