Notional fire doors

[AnthonyB]

I try and restrict terminology to keep it simple and will often use -

FD30S & FD30 etc for solid doors with good frames, hinges, intumescent strips & where appropriate cold smoke seals plus one of the marking systems (plug/label or other evidence)

Nominal 30 minute for the old pre-intumescent seal rebated doors -these now require automatic upgrade in reports.

Upgraded 30 minute for the type that had an asbestolux/superlux panel & frame rebates screwed on in response to the OSRPA & FPA - again recommend replacement

Upgraded FD30S/FD 30 for where a competent passive specialist has done it, certified it and thus took the responsibility for this

Unknown/suspect/non compliant where doubt exists or its clearly not a fire door.

Increasingly I'm getting passive specialists to survey and either replace or upgrade as they see fit as doors are often overlooked and some enforcement authorities are taking an interest - where at one time it would have been OK in their eyes to have upgraded 30 minute or nominal 30 minute doors a few are changing tack and wanting either certified upgrade or replacement to current FD30S specification. As the doors are 30-40+ years old in many cases it's fair enough - after all we have replaced the lions share of 40 year old (but still working) fire alarms and emergency lights!

[kurnal]

Nominal 30 minute for the old pre-intumescent seal rebated doors -these now require automatic upgrade in reports.

Thats where we differ Anthony. I would normally recommend upgrade on staircases and dead end corridors in sleeping risks but make a judgement elsewhere. If they are as good as the day they were fitted I would make a comment on them and recommend that they be monitored but would probably not recommend an upgrade till the place was next refurbished.

I know this does not apply to you AB but following some of the big boys around there seems to be a minimum of risk assessment and a lot of audits to current standards. In my view anyone can recommend wholesale upgrades of old buildings to current ADB standards but that is not what fire risk assessment should be about.

[Golden]

100% agree. One of my concerns over the FRA process is that it will merely become an upgrading process where every fire safety measure has to be approved and certified - which will only last until the next electrician/heating engineer/FA installer comes along with their drill anyway. Risk assessment is about taking most of the dominoes out of the row not all of them, some businesses would close if they had to replace all of their old fire doors and the skill of the FR assessor is to inform them of the ones they should replace to make the building safe with respect to life safety for its occupants.

[Tom Sutton]

Are we not complicating this matter IMO there is only two types of half an hour fire door, and both can be referred to as fire doors.

a. Certifiable fire doors ( fire door with documentation, labels and/or plugs)
b. Non-certifiable fire doors (fire doors without)

Both are fire doors and can be FD30 or FD30s. The only problem is if things go pear shaped and you may need to identify which group the fire door belonged to. You could use any means of identifying these fire doors if you think it is necessary, however the need for this information is pretty remote.

FD60 fire doors are another matter there are less indicators, maybe thickness, maybe if there is glazing but very difficult, possibly only certifiable fire door should be considered, but always taking in to account how vital these fire doors are to your means of escape scheme.

[AnthonyB]

Nominal 30 minute for the old pre-intumescent seal rebated doors -these now require automatic upgrade in reports.

Thats where we differ Anthony. I would normally recommend upgrade on staircases and dead end corridors in sleeping risks but make a judgement elsewhere. If they are as good as the day they were fitted I would make a comment on them and recommend that they be monitored but would probably not recommend an upgrade till the place was next refurbished.

I know this does not apply to you AB but following some of the big boys around there seems to be a minimum of risk assessment and a lot of audits to current standards. In my view anyone can recommend wholesale upgrades of old buildings to current ADB standards but that is not what fire risk assessment should be about.

I was/am with you, but unfortunately it's a reaction to recent enforcement notices from more than one brigade where the whole lot have had to be done regardless.

However I will try and give as generous a recommended time-scale as possible for those where realistically they can wait, so it's still highlighted they need replacing without suggesting the client has to do it the next day.

It's not helped by a lot of buildings getting areas refurbished three or four times over a 30 year period yet the old doors (because they've stayed in good nick) have remained as is, some IO's think that for some things the 'until next refurb' is a bit too open ended.

I agree there is a lot of wholesale upgrading (often beyond ADB & BS requirements) by some, which to me seems to suggest that they are not actually risk assessing the building as an individual specific structure with it's specific layout, occupancy and risk, which surely is the point of a paid for external competent person - anyone can go to a building and say 'install the highest grade/level/category of each fire precaution' which isn't the point.

[colin todd]

Tony, Does that mean if some I/o with little training and experience asked for the fire alarm cie to be painted tartan, that is what you would start recommending in all your FRAs.  The fact that enforcing authorities put things in an EN does not make it right! Our files are littered with EN requiring things that are really stupid.  A health and safety consultant recently challenged for recommending fire alarm systems in 3 blocks of  modern flats gave the lame justification that, often, enforcing authorities require it. He could yet end up paying for his reliance on the requirements of  some enforcing authorities as the basis of his FRAs.

[AnthonyB]

No, because I've challenged and won several battles, but if the client won't fight it then what can you do!

Putting unnecessary fire alarm systems in that would never be needed isn't in the same vein as upgrades.

Besides the devil is in the detail - I'm certainly not requiring a wholesale next day replacement of every door in every building instantly - the time-scales vary. Yes I almost always mention upgrading, but the time scales differ and it's only if it really needs to be a fire door - a few TD measurements, occ calculations and assessments of risk can sometimes reduce the number of doors needing work significantly and as long as I can justify which do and don't get done still am happy to do so (saving one client a packet by halving the number of doors they were otherwise going to alter)

I dread to think what I would be doing if I believed everything the IO's require and still judge each site on it's merits unlike some.