{"id":454,"date":"2023-07-03T10:19:54","date_gmt":"2023-07-03T10:19:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/?page_id=454"},"modified":"2023-07-03T10:52:10","modified_gmt":"2023-07-03T10:52:10","slug":"fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/","title":{"rendered":"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n\t

Fire Doors BIM4housing roundtables 20-06-2023<\/strong><\/h2>\n

RICHARD The main purpose of this meeting is to update and make current the guidance in 12 fire critical assets that we put together over 2 years ago in much the same format as this, along with email conversations, side meetings, telephone conversations, zoom meetings. We got it all together and obviously with the Fire Safety Act and Building Safety Act it changes the perspective somewhat. We had a good meeting yesterday where a lot of new things were raised which will be going into the new guidance. I\u2019ll hand over to George to put things into perspective a bit.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Essentially, BIM4housing isn\u2019t really just about BIM and what people perceive to be BIM, which is 3D modelling, it\u2019s really about better information management. When we started this about 3 years ago we wanted to look at what information could make the job of people who are involved in development, design, construction, manufacturing, advisory and operations easier. So we set up working groups and these working groups are now very active, we have 6 meetings a year for each of them and in those we determine what information could make the jobs easier to flow information between the different processes. They then determine what activities need to take place, for example we\u2019ve got a data workstream that\u2019s produced standardised information requirements which we can share with you. Classification and reusable libraries, the fire safety teams have been the most active and the result of that is the 12 fire safety assets that we\u2019ll be going through over the next couple of weeks. Sustainability is a big on, and also digital records.<\/p>\n

So, there\u2019s a lot activity going on, everybody volunteering their knowledge. To put it in context, one of the challenges is that we\u2019ve got lots of people that need information for different purposes and the result of that is that often you\u2019ve got different information, different levels of detail that needs to be presented in different ways. One of the ways which we\u2019re trying to look at that so that e can eat this elephant is to look at what information is likely to change, to need to be updated. Therefore it\u2019s variable or, indeed, active information, whereas fixed information or passive information is something that may be in a PDF you can read. The other thing is things like fire risk assessments and safety case reports, they\u2019re obviously very valuable but they\u2019re only correct at a moment in time and are somebody\u2019s opinion. Whereas what we need as well at the same time is something that\u2019s onward and live, so the safety management system is the important thing for housing associations. And obviously when things change risk assessments need to be rerun and it\u2019s a matter of breaking out the things that might change like fire stopping inspections, and importantly being able to tie that back to an individual asset.<\/p>\n

So, for example, we\u2019ve got lots of golden threads happening now, which is fantastic, but it needs to be tied back to an asset so that we\u2019ve got some sort of history of that asset so that when an inspection is done in Plan Radar or Riskbase or Hilti or CX, that information is always being recorded against an individual asset. The other thing is data sheets, we\u2019re getting information in O&Ms which is great if you get the information, but the difficulty is the data itself isn\u2019t auditable. So, here for example, this manufacturer\u2019s got fire rating, here we\u2019ve got fire rating described differently, and here it\u2019s described differently again. So, that\u2019s why we\u2019re trying to move towards a situation where we\u2019ve got standardised information requirements, and this is an exercise that we started 2 years ago with HACT to create standardised data templates. The different social landlords came together to agree a set of information that is common across all of the different systems they use. What we were doing as part of this exercise was to come up with a standard set of information which we could then map to Uniclass, IFC, and therefore also be able to have standardised naming for things. So, for example, an Automatic Opening Vent, it may be called an AOV or a smoke vent by different people, but they\u2019re all the same thing really.<\/p>\n

Overall we identified 245 asset types of which 71 were fire related and overall 152 are safety related. So it\u2019s giving us the opportunity to focus in on the information that\u2019s really important. The other thing is what data do we need about each of those items. COBie comes in two elements: there\u2019s information that\u2019s common to any product type, whether it\u2019s a smoke vent, a fire door or a damper. The thing that makes it different is what attributes it carries as well, and that\u2019s not so simple either because the BIM attributes are being largely compiled for design purposes. But then there is information that\u2019s needed for cost management, for example, and Etim is one that merchants use. So, it\u2019s a matter of really determining what information is needed. In this case from yesterday the AOVs, you\u2019ve got a series of attributes there and most of those really aren\u2019t important for asset management. So part of the purpose of this exercise is to really identify what information really is important in terms of the asset owners, and if we can do that it means that that information can be collected easily from supply chains.<\/p>\n

This is building on work we\u2019ve been doing for the last couple of years under the Golden Thread Initiative where we were asked to lead the asset and survey information group. There was 10 working groups in the Golden Thread Initiative and we\u2019ve been doing the asset and survey information. The question we were asking of subject matter experts was what data do we need, and invariably the answer that we got was \u2018it depends\u2019. It depends on where that door is going to be, what\u2019s it doing, how is ti expected to perform, and it\u2019s not simple to find out what\u2019s required because building regs themselves refer to 800 standards, so that\u2019s why we try to focus on 250 asset types and then we\u2019re drilling that down here to 12. These are the 12 that we\u2019re working on for the next couple of weeks. We did AOVs yesterday, Fire Doors today, we\u2019ve got Fire Dampers on Thursday and a couple of others on Friday. And this is the guidance, so this is what the team came up with 18 months ago.<\/p>\n

A description of what a fire door is and then putting it in the context of a particular risk. So, in this case we\u2019ve got a fire breaking out in a kitchen and then it\u2019s a matter of looking at what measures are in place to prevent smoke spreading in particular. To achieve that, this is what the regulator or the HSE briefed us, was to say it\u2019s all very well having the fire door working perfectly, but unless the rest of the compartment is going to perform then essentially the risk or the hazard hasn\u2019t been mitigated. And if the smoke does come out then we need to look at things like smoke control and detection. So, it\u2019s system-led thinking that we\u2019re trying to encourage. I\u2019m pleased to see that there is people in this group that aren\u2019t just focused at fire doors, they\u2019re looking at things from a wider perspective, and that\u2019s what we\u2019re trying to achieve. The guidance itself is initially what risk does that particular asset type mitigate. This is coming at it from the point of view of putting it into the safety case view. Also, what do people do to a fire door to stop it from working.<\/p>\n

The next question we asked, which is the one we really want to concentrate on today, is what information is actually needed to ensure that it performs as required, that\u2019s from a construction point of view as well. What tasks are needed to do installation, inspection and maintenance and what levels of competence are needed to ensure that the right people are doing the work and also, finally, how should any changes in the product actually be recorded. As part of this exercise we\u2019ve also had a workstream looking at the inspection procedures so that e can actually standardise the way these inspections are being done, and there is a call out here to people on here who are involved in fire doors to provide some input to that. Overall what this means is if we can get this information right we can hold information about a fire door as machine-readable information that any software application can use and therefore it also means that the new things like BS8644 can then be applied in terms of information to that object throughout the whole scheme.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Right, we\u2019ll skim through all the early stuff on the document and get to the meat and nitty gritty with the questions. This is what risks does a fire door mitigate.<\/p>\n

BRETT HIBBITT A quick question on the first few points on there. Risk of smoke buildup, risk of heat buildup, risk of spread of smoke - how can it mitigate the risk of smoke buildup and spread of smoke at the same time? A fire door definitely stops the spread of smoke, but by doing that it contains the smoke in one area, so it\u2019s not mitigating the buildup of smoke, it\u2019s actually creating that buildup of smoke in one area. So, I\u2019d question the first bullet point there by sating actually it\u2019s mitigating the risk of the spread of smoke, not the buildup.<\/p>\n

RICHARD OK, take that out. This meeting will be recorded, there will be a video available. Also, we have highpoint notes done and we look through the chat and we use the chat. So, if you\u2019ve got anything to say put it in the chat, the document is dynamic and Jiss will add that in as we go along.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST Just to counter that, could you not say that your first original point, you\u2019re mitigating the risk of smoke buildup because the fire doors stopping the smoke building up on the other side of the door.<\/p>\n

ALAN OLIVER I\u2019m very much aware that this is the first meeting I\u2019ve attended of this group and so I could be asking a really stupid question that\u2019s already been covered, but just picking up the point risk of inhibiting safe exit from the building. I did look through the current words last night and it seems that nearly all the words relate to internal fire resisting doors, but there doesn\u2019t appear to be anything at the moment on final exit doors or fire exit doors, some of which would be internal to evacuate some people from one building to another building internally, and that door would probably have fire resisting qualities. I\u2019m opening up a big can of worms here, but I think there needs to be a section on final exit doors and fire exit doors because clearly they need to have a different specification, they need to be treated in a different way to internal fire resisting doors. But if we don\u2019t deal with them under fire doors where do we deal with them?<\/p>\n

RICHARD That\u2019s a very good point, we\u2019ll perhaps discuss that afterwards.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH My point is in regards to bullet point 5. i think there needs to be a bit of clarity in how the fire door is preventing the spread of and products of combustion via cavities. To me, that\u2019s describing more of a cavity barrier rather than a fire door if we\u2019re talking about the concealed cavities you\u2019d be putting a cavity barrier in, you wouldn\u2019t necessarily see fire doors within your cavities.<\/p>\n

BRETT HIBBITT I completely agree with that.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Laura, would you like to take that away and give us an edited sentence. But we\u2019re not going to get though all of this today, by the way. Yesterday we had a dozen or so people who volunteered to continue the work because they saw value in what we\u2019re trying to achieve. So, if you\u2019re interested in contributing to this, if you could put your name in the chat then we can follow up.<\/p>\n

IAN CAVANAGH We need to be careful about going too far into this whole thing about what risk does it mitigate. In reality, everyone knows what a fire door does and we don\u2019t need to have every single thing that\u2019s included. The other thing, we shouldn\u2019t just consider fire doors here, we should consider fire strategy, and in fire strategy the escape route is important, so it\u2019s the escape route, the doors leading onto the escape route, and yes, of course, the final exit. We inspect doors, that\u2019s the mainstay of what I do, but so few people inspect the doors leading onto the escape route. And of course clients are not aware of the requirements and, to put it bluntly, it\u2019s no good having 500 perfectly compliant fire doors if when you get to your final exit door it\u2019s chained up or you can\u2019t open it because it hasn\u2019t been opened for 20 years and it\u2019s seized up. So we need to make sure that we try and move the overall focus on the fire strategy.<\/p>\n

GEORGE I agree. I think part of the issue is that people will look at things from a point of view of the individual asset, whereas I agree that we need to be looking at things at a system level and the building as a system and that would be the fire strategy as well. But what I think we\u2019ve got to do is provide some building blocks that people can work from, so it\u2019s a matter of coming from the ground up and also the top down.<\/p>\n

RICHARD We\u2019ll move down to 1b. This is what risks is a fire door itself susceptible to.<\/p>\n

GEORGE We added this in because, it\u2019s a 1b because on the previous sessions we got some really rich information back. This is really sharing experience of doors being painted over, for example, and the impact of that.<\/p>\n

IAN CAVANAGH The first and most obvious thing is the door not being installed correctly, that\u2019s the biggest risk with a fire door. The second one is lack of maintenance.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH I think apart from the material aspect of the fire door, the physical construction, the certification and stuff like that, during day to day use an aspect that\u2019s probably forgotten a little bit is the connection of the fire door to cause and effect. So say it might be connected to a mag lock or they might put a security device on a final exit fire door, it might be in a mental health institute where you have high security but you have 60 minute fire doors as well. And in instances where they cause and effect isn\u2019t programmed properly, or it isn\u2019t maintained properly, the electric locks might fix into position where the door should be opened on activation of the fire alarms, sometimes it\u2019s fixed into position and causing an entrapment situation. So in terms of the fire door being connected to other electrical and mechanical devices, there\u2019s something there I think we need to be aware of.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST That\u2019s a great point. I think a lot of awareness is required where fire doors are installed, you walk away and then the buildings responsible person suddenly decides to add access control. I think there\u2019s a lot of information there that needs to be, from an education perspective on what is that cost control, how that effects test evidence of doors and regulations. You can\u2019t just install a fire door and walk away, if the client then suddenly takes on the responsibility to add access control retrospectively. We\u2019re having some CPDs with Assa Abloy, Roy Buckingham is doing, because something we\u2019re acutely aware of, whilst e don\u2019t install access control we\u2019ve got to make sure the clients are aware of what it is and when we hand a compliantly installed fire door over, they can\u2019t just suddenly then 8turn it into a door that\u2019s not as per test evidence, specifically related to the access control. A lot more awareness needs to be made on that, that\u2019s where a lot of buildings go wrong.<\/p>\n

SIMON COLLERY In addition to listing risks, would it be possible to list the interactions between mitigations? Because as the first commenter pointed out, if you stopped smoke from moving around then you actually increase the tendency for the smoke to build up in one place, so mitigation can actually have some unintended consequences.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Let\u2019s move on to question 2. We\u2019re going to go into a little bit more detail on this. Question is what information is required about a fire door. Anything glaringly missing?<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH I think considering all of the updates from the Hackitt review and all of the emphasis on the golden thread, digitalisation of the information and looking at the life cycle of the fire door, one thing we really need to focus on is the new technology where these NFC chips are being inserted into the door. I know that most of the major manufacturers, in the timber doors they do it, it contains an ISP link, so it contains all of the information from the manufacturing plant, the distribution on all of the doors. And also what you can do is you can interface that chip with your own repairs and M&Es databases so that you can look at the whole lifecycle of the door, every repair that\u2019s been done on that door. I think that\u2019s technology we really need to make more use of in the future to manage doors more responsibly.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Absolutely. The purpose of this exercise is to determine what information should actually be there, what do we actually need.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH So that chip is in the door so I think as specifiers and if we\u2019re looking at fire doors, if you\u2019re asking for the door certificate, the door number, the door schedule, you should ask for that chip information as well. It\u2019s available on the internet or it can be scanned on the door. Most of these doors come with a very small chip, you don\u2019t even know it\u2019s there, so I think it\u2019s responsible to ask for that information and looking at storing that information through the golden thread.<\/p>\n

GEORGE I absolutely agree that we should be including that. One of the challenges, though, is that we\u2019ve got that great information that\u2019s coming through from the manufacturer, but then when the door is inspected by somebody they\u2019ll probably use a different software application to do the inspection. And the same with maintenance. So therefore what we need to do is make sure\u2026as you\u2019ve said, the information that is available from the manufacturers, they ned to share it as an open protocol.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH Yeah, most door manufacturers will just store this on the internet, they give you a link as a client and specifier and then you can download that information. It\u2019s open, it\u2019s up there for a year in most cases.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Jeremy Malet from Shellen, do you have that technology in your doors?<\/p>\n

JEREMY MALET We\u2019ve just started it, we don\u2019t use an NFC chip, we use a QR code at the moment. Obviously in time we might use an NFC chip, we need to get that tested as well with a full door set.<\/p>\n

GEORGE And will you be making the information available to others?<\/p>\n

JEREMY MALET We will, yes. On the QR code it will refer back to our main system and have that golden thread information about the door, components, specification etc.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Just to clarify that, what I\u2019m saying is I appreciate that the landlord or maintenance people will be able to access your website to see the information. I\u2019m asking whether that is going to be in a machine-readable format that, for example, could be used in Civica Cx, or something like that.<\/p>\n

JEREMY MALET I think that\u2019s absolutely why I\u2019m on this call, really, is to understand that we actually develop it in the right way so it does become open protocol.<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON Just to say that our NFC chip has been developed in that way, so whilst it\u2019s an independent platform that other applications and other maintenance companies can access if ti did need to be data readable it\u2019s stored in almost an Excel format. The one thing you can\u2019t do obviously to make data readable is have your field of application on there which needs to be specific to the door itself or the range of doors that are in the building. Because from a manufacturing perspective, just because the door has one set restrictor on it or handle on it doesn\u2019t mean that it hasn\u2019t been tested with something else, so you can replace with like tested product. So, it\u2019s really important that the field of application is on there.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s never going to made public on a website, but it will be made available to the company that purchase the door, the local authority, the responsible person as they now call them. And the generic information that links back to substrates and the major components of the door will be machine-readable, but the field of application can\u2019t be due to the nature of the document. Just to clarify, individual components will be on a data spreadsheet, so size, colour, will be machine-readable. But because of the nuances of a Word document which is the field of application we have a hundred different tests within one field of application, so you will not be able to have all the variants as machine-readable because there\u2019s a hundred different permutations.<\/p>\n

GEORGE If we look through this, let\u2019s go to the top of the list of the information. I think the point that Elliott has made is a good one, and in fact we identified this yesterday. The information that\u2019s coming through from the manufacturer is largely about the product and in many cases its about its dimensions and things like that, which is obviously important information. The door closer type and\u2026some of this information would be provided on a PDF data sheet, but other information is likely to be specific to that particular install. Acoustic properties, for example, or U value properties, I\u2019d imagine that\u2019s pretty static, that would relate to the fabricated product. The gap tolerances and things like that, those would be useful to be machine-readable because that\u2019s something than can then be used in an inspection.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Does anybody else want to add anything into that? Any glaring omissions or something you don\u2019t agree with?<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON Have we got the substrate or wall construction that it\u2019s going into in there? Because that\u2019s really important. It\u2019s just to ensure that the door has been tested in that substrate.<\/p>\n

IAIN McILWEE One of the common issues that we see is that if a door weighs more than 60 kilos, how do you fit it into the wall, because quite often you need an additional seal to support the structural weight of the door which means you\u2019ve got to change the construction fo your wall to accommodate it.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST If any of the manufacturers can educate me, what I don\u2019t understand is, we supply and install fire doors. We either get those primary asset fire door sets on a global assessment or fire door assemblies. What I don\u2019t understand is how can builders merchants sell a fire door where it\u2019s not lipped, it doesn\u2019t have any seals in it. We supply and install fire doors to exacting sizes depending on the structural opening it\u2019s going into to defined specification, so should there be some sort of guidance\u2026how can you buy, for less than \u00a3100, a fire door off the shelf and then suddenly turn that into a designed engineered tested fire door assembly you\u2019re going to install. It doesn\u2019t make any sense.<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON You can\u2019t.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST So why is this still allowed? Surely this should be outlawed? You need to get a designed engineered fire door set made to specification at the right size, either under primary test evidence, which is a fire door set, or a fire door assembly which is under global assessment which is the door core is lipped, it\u2019s got seals on it and then you use the relevant mortice ironmongery as per the global assessment.<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON Are they selling internal doors?<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST You can go to a builders merchant and pickup a fire door for less than \u00a3100, how is that possible?<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH A fantastic point, Simon, I totally agree and I think we need to be responsible, ethical and obviously we need to follow regulations which states that doors should be primary tested in the first instance, if not then you accept the field of application for global assessments. But I think if you look at hundreds of social housing blocks out there where there is antisocial behaviours, the fire brigade will knock a door down. What we do allow is to have what you\u2019d class as a door blank, a door core it could be a sandwich door, a timber door, hopefully not composite doors, but a door that is designed to withstand, that\u2019s just the core of the door itself, no ironmongery, nothing at all attached to it, that\u2019s probably got the 30 minute fire resistance. And then we\u2019d use that door as a temporary door to just block of the front entrance of the flat in the interim in lieu of having a completely certified fire door set being installed.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST The word is temporary, that\u2019s the thing. But people don\u2019t use it as a temporary, it\u2019s used as a permanent solution.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH Yeah, fortunately that sort of thing is being stopped in the industry right now because if there were to be a fatality or injury and the regulator were to ask you provide for us a door certification and evidence that this door was tested, resistance integrity and smoke, I don\u2019t think you\u2019d be in a position to provide that.<\/p>\n

ROY BUCKINGHAM In response to the comments made by Simon, the UK market allows either fire door assemblies or it allows fire door sets. The fire door set comes from a single invoiceable supplier as a complete door set, door leaf, frame, ironmongery. Whereas a door assembly is a door leaf procured from one source, a frame possibly procured from somewhere else and hardware from somewhere else, and then assembled on site to create a fire door. There is a distinct difference between those, but not should achieve a fire compartmentation rating, provided they are installed in accordance with the manufacturers instructions that define the size parameters, the hardware parameters and everything else. The problem we have in the UK is that we don\u2019t insist on competence to install those solutions to be proven. Hopefully with the introduction of BSI Flex and the competence standards coming through that will change and drive that to change to more competent people installing these solutions, but really what it needs is regulation.<\/p>\n

RICHARD It\u2019s funny you should say that. When we get to question 4, that is all about competence.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH Something that we\u2019re missing from this list is who actually installed that door, we\u2019d need a named individual so that you could say who\u2019d installed it, and which company they\u2019re from. Because you\u2019ve got the details from the manufacturer\u2026<\/p>\n

RICHARD Lets move on the second stage of question 2, because it\u2019s an important one, it\u2019s about the information.<\/p>\n

GEORGE (shares screen). This is the methodology that we started to move towards that we\u2019d like to build on, if you agree. This is something that\u2019s an international standard, RACI. It\u2019s looking at each bit of information and seeing who\u2019s responsible for it, who\u2019s accountable, who needs to be consulted, and who just needs to be kept informed. We\u2019ve tried to look at the various different stakeholders, whether it\u2019s the client or manufacturer or installer or commissioner, and look to see where this fits. Now, we\u2019re not going to do this today, but if you agree with this approach then if you put your name in the chat and you\u2019re willing to put 1 1\/2 hours aside, we\u2019ve going to set up some sessions on fire doors to go through this. This is an exercise that we did do, so we\u2019ve actually gone through quite a lot of work already which you can then contribute to.<\/p>\n

The thing I was going to say today though is that the other thing we\u2019re introducing now is whether something is active or passive. So, what information could be delivered, probably is already being delivered maybe in product data sheets, that we can use, and which of this information is something that we would like to have as machine-readable information so software can interrogate it, people that are doing inspections can check the values e.g. gap tolerances, and in terms of the weight of the product as well because having the weight as a machine-readable value means that would be much easier to check.<\/p>\n

RICHARD I think we\u2019re finished with question 2 until we can do these additional meetings, so let\u2019s move on to question 3. What tasks or procedures are required to ensure a fire door is installed, commissioned and inspected and maintained properly? Let\u2019s start with specification and installation.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Those things like the gap tolerances, if that information can be made available as machine-readable information then that would be useful. I asked Jeremy Malet to provide a couple of his data sheets just so that we could illustrate\u2026I\u2019ll start with the product specification. And if there are any other manufacturers on the call then I\u2019d be very keen to have your contribution to this. This is what Jeremy\u2019s company issues. You\u2019ve got there some fairly detailed specification information there, the certification and those standards, and here we\u2019ve got how the product performs. Ideally, this information should be in a machine-readable format, but I think we\u2019re on a journey and therefore as long as we can at least get this information for each door that\u2019s been installed, I think the asset teams would find that useful. Is there anybody on the call from asset management?<\/p>\n

This is the certificate of conformity. So, I think these are called essential characteristics, so these are the things that really should be in a machine-readable form. So, of all the hundreds of properties that you\u2019d want\u2026Jeremy, do you know if these are common to all door types, all doors?<\/p>\n

JEREMY MALET They\u2019re pretty common, there might be certain differentiations depending on the range of the doors that we provide and install.<\/p>\n

RICHARD And is the terminology the same, does everybody call it the same thing?<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON I\u2019d say it\u2019s certainly not standardised and if you wanted to put this in you\u2019d have to list every single product that your door had been tested with because we offer 4 or 5 different closers, different hardware, different lock types, so to standardise it would be quite hard.<\/p>\n

RICHARD In fact we could only do that in a machine-readable format, you couldn\u2019t do it on paper.<\/p>\n

GEORGE I thought this is part of what are called harmonised standards.<\/p>\n

IAIN McILWEE That\u2019s the declaration of performance, but the declaration of performance doesn\u2019t cover fire, it only covers other elements of the performance, so for those elements it is covered, it is standardised, for fire it isn\u2019t yet. If you took an external fire door, for example, it could be CE marked for its thermal properties, not for its fire properties.<\/p>\n

GEORGE So, Iain, would you say that for a door\u2026this is really for any door, that\u2019s what we\u2019re saying, is it? Whether it\u2019s acting as a fire door or not.<\/p>\n

IAIN McILWEE Yeah, the mechanism by which those need to be described is enshrined in the European standard.<\/p>\n

GEORGE But it would vary according to how it\u2019s being tested.<\/p>\n

IAIN McILWEE That would then depend on how you would bring that product to market, whether you have a universal declaration of performance or whether you have an individual one for every product.<\/p>\n

GEORGE OK. So, broadly would it be useful for this information to be machine-readable, or does that not rally help?<\/p>\n

IAIN McILWEE The GIN, CWS and a few others have used the PDT now, haven\u2019t they? i just put a link to it in the chat. I found out about it last week, so I haven\u2019t had time to cross reference it, but my assumption is a lot of this stuff will be enshrined in there.<\/p>\n

IAN CAVANAGH If we can go back to the heading of question 3. We need to be careful about where it says probable third-party accredited, this is one of my bugbears. I\u2019m yet to see a compliant third-party certified installation, ever, so we need to be very careful about giving it automatic approval. It\u2019s not the be all and end all.<\/p>\n

GEORGE If you want to make an edit to that, Ian.<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN I think it\u2019s really important to establish and demarcate the procurement of the door, and then you have the commissioning installation of the door, but then also when the door has already been installed the third phase now is really important (and `I thought that\u2019s what we were talking about), it\u2019s the inspection and the maintenance of that asset.<\/p>\n

RICHARD We started on the classification of the door, we go to the installation of the door, inspection and maintenance.<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN You\u2019ve got the same headings for every single topic, but for me, maintenance. So when the door has already been installed, you have the specification, you have the certificate of conformity, you have the primary test data, you have the field of application, you have the third-party accredited information, you have the blue mark whether it\u2019s BM Trada or whether it\u2019s Firas. You have all of these documents, you store that in your database because your door is already installed. I think what\u2019s important now for us to look at the second phase is how do you inspect that door because that\u2019s the point at which the door fails. A fantastic 60 minute fire door with all the ironmongery that\u2019s listed on the field of application, perfectly installed by responsible installers, but then it\u2019s not inspected and it\u2019s not maintained. So, what is the information that you need for that stage.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Can I make 2 points on that. The first point is, you\u2019ve got all that information and it\u2019s all perfect if it\u2019s a new installation. If it\u2019s existing, you haven\u2019t, and most of the properties is existing. The second point is what you\u2019re saying about the inspections, we\u2019ve actually been running a number of workshops with Alan Oliver who wrote a standardised inspection regime for the NHS. And he\u2019s currently putting one together, in conjunction with a number of our experts, for housing\/residential. So, believe me, we\u2019re on that.<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN My closing point is I think in that form that you had, George, the information that would be important to have is from door manufacturers what do you need. If that door breaks, what are the allowed, what are the authorised ironmongery that you\u2019re allowed based on the manufacturers instructions and the filed of application report. That is the list that you need from manufacturers. If the door is damaged, how many microns of paint, is it lead-based, what are you allowed to do to maintain that door. If the door is exposed to a weather, say it\u2019s on an open deck balcony, it\u2019s a fire door, what is the maintenance regime. That sort of information is really important during the inspection and maintenance phase and it\u2019s really lacking. Landlords are just left in the lurch because they don\u2019t have access to that sort of information and in a lot of situations the warranty is breached because of that.<\/p>\n

GEORGE I fully agree. The question is how do we get that information. The view is it will all be in the O&M, but we know that it won\u2019t. Unless we specify it, unless we say what we need, then we won\u2019t and then it\u2019s also a matter of making it attractive and simple for the door manufacturers to provide that information. Elliott, how would you be able to satisfy what Ranie has just asked?<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN About the maintenance regime. When a door has been installed, normally the manufacturer will just say we advise that you maintain and you\u2019ll keep you door, but it doesn\u2019t actually give you a list of authorised products that you are allowed to change, certain types of ironmongery, door closers, letter boxes, if the paint was destroyed. They\u2019re not going to send it back to your manufacturing plant so therefore if you provide a maintenance regime, something the compliance department can then take into account and say, for instance, you\u2019re allowed 1.5 microns of this type of paint. It allows the door to be maintained and the life cycle do the door to be kept, and the integrity of the door to perform in case there was a fire.<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON That would all be held within the field of application. So, with your NFC chip that\u2019s in your door you\u2019d have a link to that and it would literally show you all the components parts that are allowed to be put onto that door. And that goes back to the point I made earlier about making it really hard for it all to be data readable because you\u2019ve got so many variables that you could put on a tested door set. With regards to paint, we\u2019re composite so you\u2019d tend to find that you wouldn\u2019t respray, if the door fades it would be within warranty, it\u2019s almost a lifetime guarantee. Water-based paint doesn\u2019t make a difference, it\u2019s not an accelerant so it won\u2019t be fire rated as such. But yeah, everything is in the field of application, there\u2019s no desktop studies anymore, it is this door has been tested with this product, so that\u2019s what it can be replaced with. So, for Roy\u2019s example, we\u2019ve got different closers that can be put on our door so you can go on there and look at the closers. If the closer has been damaged, as long as there is no external damage to the door as a result of it being taken off then it can be replaced with a product that is tested.<\/p>\n

GEORGE How widely is what you\u2019re doing being done by other people, Elliott?<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON I can\u2019t speak for everybody, but we use a generic system provider which is an independent team and the more people that sign up with them, this data is available. So anybody that uses at NFC chip or QR code I would think would have that data accessible to the responsible person in some way, shape or form to allow maintenance of that product.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Can I just clarify, this is really important: would that external provider, are they making that information machine-readable available to somebody that is maybe using Alex Oldham\u2019s Civica system?<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON The only way we\u2019d be able to do that is to deconstruct a Word document and put it into machine-readable format. At the moment it\u2019s a Word document, so it\u2019s not machine-readable really. But it could be made machine-readable.<\/p>\n

GEORGE I\u2019ve gone to far there by asking for it be machine-readable. Are you saying that\u2019s available to be downloaded by the end client?<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN A CD5 format, batch files, anything, it\u2019s quite easy.<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON Well, it\u2019s a Word document and it\u2019s a controlled document, therefore you\u2019re not able to touch or open or do anything with it, so from a machine-readable format, it\u2019s not because it\u2019s a PDF or Word document and you have to go to the pertinent place.<\/p>\n

GEORGE As a landlord, would they be able to download it?<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON No. They could view it, but they couldn\u2019t download it, it\u2019s a controlled document. Fabricators can have it, I\u2019d have to speak to our technical team to look at exactly how they could, but it\u2019s a controlled document, they\u2019re not allowed to edit it or touch it in any way, shape or form.<\/p>\n

GEORGE So actually, for Ranie\u2019s purposes it probably isn\u2019t useable then?<\/p>\n

ELLIOTT DAWSON well, it is, because if you\u2019ve got damage to product number 1, Ranie Towers, they go in and look at that door and they can go, right, our door closer is damaged, what door closer? You go to the door closer section and it will give you products that you can replace it with. But it\u2019s just not machine-readable, you couldn\u2019t type in door closers and it go to it, you\u2019d have to manually search the document to find it.<\/p>\n

PENCHO STUDENKOV If you could just go back to the specifications, I think the specifications are a very important part of it. In terms of the gaps, this is just specific requirements for the gap tolerances, but in terms of specifications I think we should be more comprehensive. It should set out to what standard the fire door should comply in regards to fire, security, these kind of aspects, even the installation. Instead of referring to the door gaps which is a specific item, you can just refer back to manufacturing instructions in terms of door gaps etc. Also, to be in line with BS8240 in the specific standards. At this part, it\u2019s important to set out exactly what you previously taught about the door assembly. So doors to be installed either as a door set or door assembly, up to this stage. You can actually decide, you can specify whether or not you want the primary test data no matter whether installing the primary test doors or door assembly, we can get that information from the door manufacturer in most cases.<\/p>\n

IAN CAVANAGH Ranie\u2019s discussion earlier about components in the door, again, we shouldn\u2019t lose sight of this information should automatically be provided to comply with regulation 38, and we can\u2019t escape that, that shouldn\u2019t already be there. And clients need to be aware of the main contractors responsibilities to comply with regulation 38, all the information should be automatically provided, it\u2019s nothing new.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST I think the whole world of the maintenance of existing fire doors is very murky and needs a whole separate conversation. Specifically when a fire door is client declared fire door, it doesn\u2019t have an stamps on it, there\u2019s no manufacturer\u2019s evidence\u2026maintenance works great on a fire door is there\u2019s test evidence because it stands as an O&M manual and you can see what component parts you need to use to change and replace. Speaking as someone who surveys, installs, maintains fire doors, I\u2019d say 70-80% of the doors we survey and maintain don\u2019t have stamps on them, they are client declared to us. We\u2019re seeing bastardised things done, upgraded random timber door into a fire door. I\u2019s a very grey, murky world out there and it needs a whole separate conversation on a standardised set of rules, crib sheets, on what to do and what you can\u2019t do to maintain an existing fire door that is not a stamped, labelled fire door, but the client has declared it as such.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Question 4: What level of competency and training needs to be in place? So, we\u2019ve got installation. Obviously the competency of installers, third-party accreditations. Have a look through that, who wants to add into there?<\/p>\n

IAN CAVANAGH We\u2019ve ignored City & Guilds qualified joiners in the various statements there. That\u2019s a start. I don\u2019t see that supervisors need to have a Level 3 NVQ Diploma in wood occupations at all, supervisors just need to be good at their job, and I think it\u2019s somewhat restrictive to suggest that a supervisor themselves should be qualified.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Has anybody else got any thoughts on whether supervisors need an NVQ Diploma?<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN I think they absolutely do. The door is only as strong as how well it\u2019s installed. In te BM Trada scheme, for instance, you have a supervisor being trained up to deliver that training onto a garage full of 20 chippies, for example, so really you have to have that level of accountability and I think it\u2019s absolutely a step backward if we remove that competency, that training qualification and that accountability for that one main person that\u2019s delivering the work of that team. Don\u2019t forget they\u2019re the ones doing the QAs and responsible for sign offs and stuff like that, so I disagree with that.<\/p>\n

IAN CAVANAGH Ranie, I\u2019m yet to see a third-arty certified compliant installation, ever, and I look at a lot of installations. Third-party certification is projected as being the be all and end all, and it really isn\u2019t. One person cannot supervise 20 installers, they cannot physically do it, and if there\u2019s any installers (I\u2019m sure Simon will agree), one person cannot oversee 20 people. What we need is qualified installers at a personal level.<\/p>\n

ALAN OLIVER I don\u2019t disagree with everything that Ian\u2019s saying, but the idea that he\u2019s never seen a complaint third-party accredited installation is really concerning for me because by implication what you\u2019re saying is that there is no such thing, and that\u2019s certainly not the case. I\u2019m not aware if you\u2019ve ever seen any of our installations, I\u2019m very proud of the fact that my company delivers fire compliant installations and we work in very tough regimes, we work in hospital trusts where we\u2019re under a great deal of scrutiny. We do get adequately and robustly inspected by BRELPCB. I do agree with Ian that third-party certification and accreditation clearly isn\u2019t the full story, and I\u2019m aware there are some third-party accreditation schemes that are not fit for purpose.<\/p>\n

RICHARD It seems to be more about the competency of the accreditation.<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH We\u2019re using the word supervisors here, would it not be better to break it down and say if you\u2019re actually physically installing a fire door we\u2019d expect you to meet these competencies. If you\u2019re overseeing or signing off the work of an installer we\u2019d expect you to be able to demonstrate these competencies. I appreciate there are people who supervise others, but then there\u2019ll be people that are signing the work off and I think we need to be clear who we\u2019re intending needs to meet which competencies.<\/p>\n

SIMON WEST I agree with most points here. We\u2019re a third-party accredited surveyor\/installer\/maintainer, all of our surveyors do have NVQ and we\u2019ve most of them from apprenticeships all the way up to where they are now, most of them are senior guys. I would like to think that they have a very decent level of knowledge in terms of how to install a fire door, but I would also argue that perhaps their role as a supervisor is to make sure that things are done compliantly rather than having actually to have physically installed a door in the past. We just happen to have installers that are previous installers as well and are now supervisors. I do agree that some third-party schemes are particularly flawed.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Right, let\u2019s continue, scroll down through installation. So, that\u2019s the maintenance which we\u2019ve touched on, anybody think that anything needs to be added into there?<\/p>\n

PENCHO STUDENKOV The maintenance work should be also in part with\u2026BS8214, in regards to installation, if you can add that because it\u2019s a good kind of standard.<\/p>\n

RANIE GOOLCHARAN One like for regulations because before I think maintenance was an objective thing, I\u2019ll do it as reasonably practical, but now I think the law is quite clear, how often you have to inspect communal doors, front entrance doors, every 6 months, 1 year. So I think it\u2019s quite important to specify in the maintenance adherence to regulation, not only British standard but also statue which now requires us to maintain within certain time frames.<\/p>\n

IAIN McILWEE One of the things that\u2019s quite important is to ensure whoever installs it does have some kind of interaction with whoever is preparing the door opening because the door installer\u2026preparing the opening and the opening needs to be complaint for the door to be complaint and that\u2019s something we\u2019ve got to factor in.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Question 5: How should product changes be recorded?<\/p>\n

GEORGE The context of this is quite interesting because it\u2019s really coming in from the fact that now the gateways are requiring design to be complete before construction starts, it seems to be starting to gain traction. So the change management process of going from a specification to the actual product is something that there\u2019s a lot more interest in. We\u2019ve started having conversations with MBS who produce the specification applications to see how we can glue together a specification with the product data.<\/p>\n

The important thing here in general is if you think what we\u2019ve got in this information is useful, what we need to do is figure out a way that we can turn this into something that people can consume, because otherwise it\u2019s an overwhelming amount of information. So, if you\u2019re interested in putting a couple of hours in to work on this, if you could put your names in the chat. Broadly, there\u2019s 3 areas: there\u2019s people that are interested in the data, so how can we take this and make it in a form that we can then interpret, so machine-readable information, for example. Others, you might be interested in process, and also there\u2019s application. If you\u2019re interested in particular in any of those three and you\u2019re willing to make some time contribution then we\u2019d be keen to get your input.<\/p>\n

Also, if you know of main contractors, because obviously to some extent this is going to be driven through procurement, we want to engage with design managers and people that are responsible for maybe appointing works. So, if you\u2019ve got people that you could introduce us to that we can bring into this conversation, that would be very useful. Most of the Tier 1 contractors are part of BIM4housing, but at the end of the day it comes down to who the individuals are. So, if Harry Jones is somebody that actually is appointing you on projects, either for doing refurbishment work or whatever, and you want to influence how they're thinking then let us know.<\/p>\n

RICHARD Anybody got any thoughts on this change management question? Some of the asset types last time, we actually had two roundtables on, plus a lot more was done outside of those. And we thought we\u2019d got everything nailed. Yesterday and today it\u2019s quite astonishing how much extra input we\u2019ve had that we can action on.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Thank you very much for investing your time here today. Do you feel that what we\u2019re doing here is useful?<\/p>\n

ALAN OLIVER I think what we're doing here is essential, George, because I think we've already discussed today the fact that it's a real jungle out there. There's people who are doing training schemes, claiming that within 8 hours they can make people competent to install a door, inspect the door and sign off, maintain the door and sign off a door, which is absolutely ludicrous. We can't control or educate the whole jungle, but if we just focus on getting the right information and getting it out to the key people within the housing sector, we'll be doing the industry a massive favour.<\/p>\n

GEORGE Laura, as a landlord, is this sort of information useful for you?<\/p>\n

LAURA SMITH Yeah, I think aside from just myself there is a lot of housing associations who are a lot smaller than we are and I think it would be very beneficial to them as well as you\u2019ve got housing associations that manage properties on a day-to-day basis for other companies, it would be helpful for them. I think we\u2019ve just got to get it into a format that people would understand as well, outside of our industry, because at the moment I think they\u2019d get quite confused.<\/p>\n

ADDENDUM<\/strong><\/p>\n

CHAT<\/p>\n

Buckingham, Roy<\/strong><\/p>\n

Fire compartmentation and escape go hand in hand in any properly created fire strategy for a building. The compartmentation protects the escape routes but fire doors within this compartmentation may also be escape doors and have to be easily opened to allow safe egress.<\/p>\n

Laura Smith<\/strong><\/p>\n

I would be very interested in volunteering to assist with this<\/p>\n

Jeremy Malet<\/strong><\/p>\n

Could it read 'The risk of spread of heat and smoke to other compartments internally'<\/p>\n

Buckingham, Roy<\/strong><\/p>\n

Risk of modification<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

A few I noted were: Removal of closure
\nRe-sizing outside of scope
\nGlazing<\/p>\n

Buckingham, Roy<\/strong><\/p>\n

I would also say lack of awareness by building ocupants of the purpose of the door<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Also drawing on the concept of Execution Details in NBS - installation and ensuring consideration of compatibility in the partition has been allowed for.<\/p>\n

Glazing should be \"Glazed outside of scope and\/or controlled environment\"<\/p>\n

Ranie Goolcharan<\/strong><\/p>\n

Fire Doors being connected to electrical or mechanical connections such as access control mechanisms (mag locks, hold open device, security panels, fobs) that has a risk of failure and thereby causing entrapment risks<\/p>\n

Buckingham, Roy<\/strong><\/p>\n

if the hardware used to electrically lock an access control door is escape compliant and correctly installed entrapment cannot happen<\/p>\n

Peter Wheeler<\/strong><\/p>\n

I think that user information is key, I've got a sheltered scheme that every time I visit I find that doors are wedged open. I'm drawing up a glossy leaflet for 'aftercare of your new fire door'<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

Q2. Who installed it and when.<\/p>\n

Simon Collery<\/strong><\/p>\n

In addition to listing risks can we consider the effect a mitigation can have on other risks. For example, if you take steps to stop smoke moving around you can increase the risk of smoke building up, or make it more difficult to remove smoke from an area. Possible 'unintended consequences' of certain mitigations?<\/p>\n

Simon West<\/strong><\/p>\n

More training and education required across the board for all stakeholders with regards to a fire doors access control, what is permitted, what is not permitted, particularly if access control is to be retrospectively fitted.<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Just again to harping back to last one, \"painted over\" is an odd one, is this labels painted over??<\/p>\n

In installation: Components missing (e.g. screws and hinge pads).<\/p>\n

Great stuff from FDIS to help here
\nhttps:\/\/fdis.co.uk\/2022\/07\/04\/warning-as-three-quarters-of-fire-doors-fail-inspections\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Top three common reasons for failure: are excessive gaps, issues around smoke sealing, and care and maintenance issues.<\/p>\n

Alex Oldman<\/strong><\/p>\n

Section 4: I'd like to see a section added to the competency\/accreditation requirements for Inspections<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Linking back to additional security being added outside of scope. Key here is to understand other performance requirements (e.g. thermal and acoustic).<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

We need to be cautious of ignoring the existing Regulation 38 requirements regarding fire safety date for fire doors etc.<\/p>\n

Clients are generally ignorant of Regulation 38 and M\/C's are obviously reluctant to provide \/ comply.<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

Primary test evidence on it's own is very limiting. A GA \/ FoA is required in reality.<\/p>\n

Richard Michael<\/strong><\/p>\n

There doesn't seem to be a mention of Primary Test Evidence as an alternative to Global Assessments.<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

I was alerted to a new Doorset PDT that GAI have led the development of Doorsets (gai.org.uk), not managed to cross reference as only just alerted to it.<\/p>\n

Michael O'Flaherty<\/strong><\/p>\n

Just a thought on gaps around timber doors. Do we know if these are prone to swell and shrink? A big challenge when carrying out quarterly and annual inspections. Also a risk that multiple rounds of adjusting will make the door gaps change more frequently as the screw holes become looser.<\/p>\n

Brett Hibbitt<\/strong><\/p>\n

Type of door should include rating such as FD30s<\/p>\n

Patrick Achief<\/strong><\/p>\n

How do we incorporate a door that are being upgraded to a fire door?<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Weight of doorset is critical - if wall needs to carry more than 60Kg this will need to be factored in to the construction of the wall and how the opening is made and the boards can abbut. Also you may need to consider how the frame is fitted to the wall (often door manuf test demands fixing to timber, but the wall manufacturer may not support the timbe added to constructed - also need to consider fixings that would need to clear the timber and embed into the metal to cover the structural element needed).<\/p>\n

QMark isn't the only certification scheme, IFC and Certifire use labels. think BSI also have a certification scheme (although not sure I have ever seen a door covered by it).<\/p>\n

Woollard, Ian<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ranie is absolutley right. TEMPORARY DOOR. awaiting final primary tested door set<\/p>\n

Jeremy Malet<\/strong><\/p>\n

Should there by a classification of fire door assemblies or doorsets under type or similar<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Few other bits to consider e.g. if timber chain of custody information<\/p>\n

EPDs<\/strong><\/p>\n

\/LCAs<\/strong><\/p>\n

George with respect, could we consider language on this, dynamic and static may be better (passive is heavily associated with fire protection).<\/p>\n

Buckingham, Roy<\/strong><\/p>\n

The key requirement for Q3 is Competence<\/p>\n

Alex Oldman<\/strong><\/p>\n

Q3 - specification - all this data does need a timestamp when it's being taken Because gaps can vary been specification, installation and inspection.<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

This is perhaps where we could embed full performance requirements (e.g. fire, thermal, acoustic, environmental, wind load, finish) again the doorset PDT is a good starter.<\/p>\n

Certification is also key as is perhaps any limitations (see the CCPI requirements).
\nPDT here agan in case lost - Doorsets (gai.org.uk)<\/p>\n

Michael O'Flaherty<\/strong><\/p>\n

It says gaps between door and frame should be less than 4mm which is incorrect. 2-4mm. Less than 4mm suggests 4 in non-compliant.
\nAlso need to take a view on what gap tolerance is reasonable and proportionate. It's very difficult to maintain the 2-4mm tolerance.<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

Not if installed correctly. That's the big issue.<\/p>\n

This current subject is Regulation 38 in essence.<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Is warranty the key word. It should detail how certification is maintained.<\/p>\n

Need to be careful of how much detail - if we press that maintenance and inspection should be done by people who are competent to maintain and inspect. That way the asset owner is pushed towards people who will understand and are capable of ensuring that they know what to look for. Everybody doesn't have to know everything as George said at the outset.<\/p>\n

Need to be cognisant of IP here and respect commerciality whilst providing the right amount of transparency. The vital thing throughout is we are always looping back to competence of installation, maintenance and inspection. That way \"reasonable\" assessments will be made and \"informed decisions\".<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

City ^ Guilds quals ignored
\nSupervisors don't need to be qualified.<\/p>\n

Buckingham, Roy<\/strong><\/p>\n

There needs to be a competency standard defined for fire door installers a bit like the BSI 8671\/BS8672 etc.<\/p>\n

Jeremy Malet<\/strong><\/p>\n

should a supervisor have a level 2 or 3 in passive fire i.e. ASFP<\/p>\n

Allan Harrison (Guest)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Insurance companies should be approached to confirm they accept upgrades of existing fire doors.<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Occupational Works Supervisor Qualifications are an important safety net, but Ian make a point that is important to capture. The theory is right, but there needs to be a balance between organisational capability and occupational competence.<\/p>\n

Pencho Studenkov<\/strong><\/p>\n

1 supervisor responsible for a maximum of 10 installers?<\/p>\n

Jeremy Malet<\/strong><\/p>\n

competency matrix?<\/p>\n

Laura Smith<\/strong><\/p>\n

Where we are stating the competency that people need to meet it needs to be very clear who needs to meet what competency. E.g. if you are installing a fire door you need to meet this list of competency. If you overseeing others work you need to meet this competency list<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

Maintainers should ideally be capable of installing.<\/p>\n

My thoughts on TPC v Personal Quals.
\nhttps:\/\/www.firedooracademy.co.uk\/tpc-installation-schemes-v-personal-qualifications\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

Critical liasons: The contractor who is responsible for preparing the door opening, less prevalent, but possibly also the flooring as again issues can occur.<\/p>\n

Richard Michael<\/strong><\/p>\n

Perhaps split maintenance into two parts, inspection and repairs. Inspection could be done on one property visit to include other items that require annual servicing (MVHR\/TMV\/HIU etc). Any repairs identified could then be carried out by someone with additional qualifications. This would assist on social housing where access can be an issue.<\/p>\n

Pencho Studenkov<\/strong><\/p>\n

re Specifications: Suggestion- To be more comprehensive and specific to the fire door design and installation - i..e Timber Door sets to meet ADB, and relevant British Standards in regards to Fire and Security (BS 9999; BS9991; BS 8214; BS 465-22; BS 476-31; ES EN 1634 part 1 and 3, Approved Document Q\/ PAS24, etc.). Doors to be tested as a complete installed assembly with all primary tests reports provided. All door must have undergone testing at a UKAS accredited test laboratory.<\/p>\n

Ranie Goolcharan<\/strong><\/p>\n

Maintenance of Fire Doors is now a regulatory responsibility, i.e. BSA & FSA and Fire doors should now be checked at least once every six months. If the door is in a high traffic area or used frequently then they should be checked more regularly e.g. once a week\/month as signs of wear will appear more quickly with increased use. Reference to statute requirements are essential to mention in maintenance regimes;<\/p>\n

Jeremy Malet<\/strong><\/p>\n

quarterly for communal doors in buildings above 11 metres<\/p>\n

Ian Cavanagh<\/strong><\/p>\n

It has been for at least 17 years. Sadly very few clients have adhered.<\/p>\n

It is a step in the right direction.<\/p>\n

Iain Mcilwee<\/strong><\/p>\n

great to get that wider context played in. I think as a final comment, it is useful, next step to consider how it will be used and embed in e.g. NBS and referred to in specification. Think needs to link to the work GAI have done with others.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Fire Doors BIM4housing roundtables 20-06-2023 RICHARD The main purpose of this meeting is to update and make current the guidance in 12 fire critical assets that we put together over 2 years ago in much the same format as this, along with email conversations, side meetings, telephone conversations, zoom meetings. We got it all together…<\/p>\n

Read More<\/span>+<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-454","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\nFIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023 - BIM4Housing Fire Safety<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023 - BIM4Housing Fire Safety\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Fire Doors BIM4housing roundtables 20-06-2023 RICHARD The main purpose of this meeting is to update and make current the guidance in 12 fire critical assets that we put together over 2 years ago in much the same format as this, along with email conversations, side meetings, telephone conversations, zoom meetings. We got it all together…Read More+\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"BIM4Housing Fire Safety\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-07-03T10:52:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"46 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\\\/\",\"name\":\"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023 - BIM4Housing Fire Safety\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2023-07-03T10:19:54+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-07-03T10:52:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/\",\"name\":\"BIM4Housing Fire Safety\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bim4housing.com\\\/fire-safety\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023 - BIM4Housing Fire Safety","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023 - BIM4Housing Fire Safety","og_description":"Fire Doors BIM4housing roundtables 20-06-2023 RICHARD The main purpose of this meeting is to update and make current the guidance in 12 fire critical assets that we put together over 2 years ago in much the same format as this, along with email conversations, side meetings, telephone conversations, zoom meetings. We got it all together…Read More+","og_url":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/","og_site_name":"BIM4Housing Fire Safety","article_modified_time":"2023-07-03T10:52:10+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"46 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/","url":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/","name":"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023 - BIM4Housing Fire Safety","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/#website"},"datePublished":"2023-07-03T10:19:54+00:00","dateModified":"2023-07-03T10:52:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/fire-doors-bim4housing-roundtables-20-06-2023\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"FIRE DOORS BIM4HOUSING ROUNDTABLES 20-06-2023"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/#website","url":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/","name":"BIM4Housing Fire Safety","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/454","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=454"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/454\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":458,"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/454\/revisions\/458"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=454"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=454"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bim4housing.com\/fire-safety\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=454"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}