Focus on energy consumption

During recent years we have seen a growing focus on the energy consumption of buildings. This can be seen in the Norwegian building code (TEK10 and TEK17) as well as in the Norwegian standard NS 3700 “Criteria for passive houses and low energy buildings”. Also, the overall political ambition is to lower the energy consumption of buildings and homes.

When comparing old building codes (before the year 1997) to the new ones there is a notable difference in requirements when it comes to energy use, and requirements regarding facilitation for the use of renewal energy sources. When building passive houses and low energy buildings the criteria are even stricter.

New products and technical solutions

Due to the political goals and the requirements in the building code there is a growing use of advanced technology, including control systems, heat pumps, ventilation systems, solar panels etc. In addition to the technical appliances, more insulation is used, and buildings are more air-tight. This in turn creates a demand for alternative solutions and materials. The geometric characteristics of a building also impact the energy effectiveness.

All these aspects will to some degree affect planning, construction and the end-use of buildings. A new and «untraditional» solution, or a new energy consumption product, will not only affect the energy consumption of the building, but can also affect other areas within the building. This could potentially pose a hazard due to changed premises for the building.

Fundamental changes create fire safety challenges

New and alternative products for the construction of energy efficient buildings has led to a relatively quick development from traditional materials and solutions. We have therefore seen a need for identifying which consequences the development can have in terms of fire safety. In a project carried out in 2015 [1], a literature study was performed, identifying several topics of interest related to energy efficient buildings.

Solar cells

One of these topics was photovoltaic installations (solar cells). The study showed that there is no easy way for the fire brigade to cut the voltage from such installations. This means that there is a risk of electrical shock for the fire brigade, when applying water, or by direct contact with the installation. Another challenge is the handling of photovoltaic installations damaged from fire. Some of the materials and components can be harmful for humans, both by skin contact and by particle inhalation.

Wood-based building products

There is an increasing interest for wood-based building products, such as cross laminated timber (CLT). These products are being used in increasingly taller and larger buildings. The use of combustible materials in construction elements is not pre-accepted in Norwegian regulations. In large buildings, there is less documentation of the use of wood-based products compared to traditional solutions using non-combustible materials, such as concrete and steel. For cross laminated timber and glue-laminated timber, there is an ongoing debate regarding which documentation is needed to deviate from pre-accepted solutions. At RISE Fire Research in Trondheim, wood-based building products and fire safety is the topic of an ongoing project in 2018, led by senior research scientist Nina Kristine Reitan.

Industry input

In a project which started in spring 2018, we are now studying the fire safety of energy efficient buildings. The project is funded by the Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection (DSB) and the Norwegian Building Authority (DiBK). One of the goals is to give input to Norwegian authorities on how new products and technical solutions affect fire safety. Photovoltaic installations, batteries and extinguishing are important focus areas in these projects. Input from stakeholders within the industry who have an interest in energy efficient buildings, is an important part of the project. Brandposten’s readers are welcome to contact the project manager, Ragni Fjellgaard Mikalsen, if you want to learn more about, or contribute to the project.

The post Energy efficient buildings and Fire Safety appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

A new report from RISE and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU) presents an analysis of the emergency services’ call-outs to forest fires over the last 18 years. The incidents were correlated with meteorological data at the ignition site and with a new summary of the presence of boulders on the ground. An interview-based study of forestry contractors is also presented in order to obtain information about more specific circumstances surrounding ignition and about their procedures relating to fire risk and initial fire-fighting measures in the event of fire.

(Left) Geographical distribution of forest machine ignition incidents resulting in the rescue service dispatch. (Right) Distribution of the boulder index across the country, areas with abundance of large rocks . The colours indicate what proportion of forest land has large number of boulders, described in more detail in the report.

A large part of Sweden’s forests is used for industrial forestry, which involves traffic in which heavy machines drive across large areas of forest. Three main activities take place with forest tractors: clear-felling with harvesters, extraction to the nearest forest road with forwarders and thereafter scarification of clearings improve the success of seedling establishment. During scarification, humus is removed and mineral soil is exposed in continuous strips with the aid of two or three rotating discs.

The study shows that every year there are on average 330–480 ignitions from forest machines in Sweden, Figure 2. Of these, 32–37 result in an alarm and fire-fighting measures by the emergency services. Approx. 75% are started in connection with scarification, and the rest are dominated by forwarders. With the exception of the major fire in Västmanland, fires initiated by forest machines that result in the emergency services being called out correspond to 260–310 hectares of burnt land per annum, which is about 20% of all forest land damaged by fire every year.

The ignitions normally occur during normal operations in the late afternoon. More than 90% of ignitions are dealt with by the machine operator using a foam extinguisher, water bottles or hand-held tools and are never reported to the emergency services. Those that cannot be dealt with by the operators themselves are usually bigger than forest fires in general and there is a clear correlation in their scope with the time from alarm until the emergency services can start their damage limitation work.

Dry humus appears to be a key parameter for ignition compared with forest fires in general, aside from the general fire risk index (Fire Weather Index – FWI), which is calculated and forecast every day by the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI). Another clear key parameter for the ignition frequency, comparable with a risk assessment based on the weather conditions, is the presence of boulders in cleared areas.

Correlation between ignition frequency and Boulder Index.

The mechanisms behind the ignition incidents vary. The study finds examples of hot chips from the chassis protection steel torn off during contact with hard rocks as well as wheel tracks sliding against rocks and generating hot particles. Disc teeth in contact with stones also create frequent sparks and is considered to be the most common ignition mechanism, making scarification stand out among activities in forestry.

Fires generally appear to start by smouldering before transitioning to flaming combustion. This transition can in some cases be significantly delayed (several hours to days), which means that there is a great potential for unrecorded events affecting the number and area of forest machine ignitions from fires where the cause cannot be determined by the first responders.

The results in the study indicate big potential to limit the problem. First and foremost, the index in the fire risk system should be taken into account. Days with a FWI > 20, for example, accounted for more than 33% of all ignitions, but only occur on an average of 4–5 days a year in central Sweden. Other precautionary measures should be that there is always a box containing effective fire-fighting tools on the machines and to avoid rocky areas. The most cost-efficient method of reducing the problem is probably basic fire-fighting training for operators. This would help them to identify risk situations and also increase the chances of prompt extinguishing if ignition occurs.

The study was funded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry (KSLA), and the results can be accessed in the report entitled “Skogsbränder orsakade av Skogsmaskiner” [“Forest Fires Caused by Forest Machines”], RISE report 2018:35. More information about the fire risk system may be found here.

The post Forest Machines Start Fires appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

Do you protect your assets with fire suppression systems?

Gaseous extinguishing systems safeguard vitally important infrastructure against special hazards.

Failure to monitor the gaseous extinguishing system which is fundamental to the protection of the workers and asset is inadmissible. It imperils the lives of occupants of the premises. It risks incurring crippling financial and reputational loss to the facility is a fire event comprises the critical infrastructure.

Regulations demand maintenance of the systems to ensure that they are operational in the event of a fire: ISO 14520-1:2015(E) assumes that these systems accidentally discharge and leak. The reality is that gaseous systems are checked for contents annually because they are pressurised and anything that is dynamic offers risk of loss of contents, but this fails to deal with the probability of discharge or leakage for the 364 days per annum in the interim between certification checks.

Using pressure gauges to monitor your systems?

Generally speaking, when a portion of the contents of a pressurised suppression cylinder escapes, the internal pressure inside the vessel will decrease. However, due to the dependence of the internal pressure on the temperature of the agent and the difficulties involved in accounting for this, this can sometimes lead to false negatives, thereby endangering the lives of those in the vicinity. Testing fire suppression systems with an ultrasonic liquid level indicator is therefore a necessary test required to ensure that suppression systems are safe and functioning correctly.

Variation in Pressure Over Modest Temperature Fluctuations

A change in temperature of just 5°C, for example from 17°C to 22°C can lead to significant changes in pressure in cylinders, while the liquid level remains comparatively constant. The below data demonstrates this for three typical super-pressurised cylinders.

Agent Type Fill Pressure (bar) Printed Agent Mass (kg) Pressure Change Liquid Level Change
FM®-200 25.8 96.8 4.85% 1.39%
FM®-200 42.4 104 3.11% 0.27%
Novec1230 25 10 2.70% 0.70%

Official ISO and NFPA regulations state that if the pressure in a cylinder was to drop by greater than 10% of its initial value it should be replaced, however, if the temperature of the contents increases, the base pressure may increase by up to 5% (or more for greater temperature changes). This means that the equivalent isothermal pressure would have to drop by close to 15% before a leak is recognised.

One should account for the effect of temperature when checking a pressure gauge however it is often difficult to determine an exact pressure value from a gauge (for example gauges frequently consist simply of a green section and a red section with widely-spaced tick marks). In addition to this, sometimes the internal temperature of the cylinder varies with respect to the ambient temperature.

The Solution?

Given that the liquid level in a cylinder tends to vary far less with temperature, using a portable ultrasonic liquid level indicator (Portalevel® MAX) is a reliable method of detecting leaks in cylinders, even when pressure gauges fail to do so.

Using the Portasteele® CALCULATOR in combination with the Portalevel MAX enables the recorded liquid level to be converted into agent weight which accounts for the change in ambient temperature. Unlike pressure gauges, using the Portalevel® MAX with the Portasteele® CALCULATOR is negligibly affected by temperature changes and therefore gives an accurate reading of cylinder contents.

Choose smart technology today to ensure your systems will work in the event of a fire and that people and asset are protected. Enquire today for the Portalevel® MAX & Portasteele® CALCULATOR.

For more information visit www.coltraco.com/

The post Pressure Gauges Alone are Insufficient for Detecting Leaks appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

The research project “Fire safety in connection with the storage of waste fuels” was initiated in order to increase knowledge and suggest measures to reduce fire risks at waste facilities, primarily on the basis of practical experiences from safety work undertaken and fires that have occurred at various facilities. The project was carried out by RISE and Sweco and financed by the Swedish Waste Management Association. The project was divided into three main parts: an analysis of intervention statistics from the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB), workshops with representatives from various waste facilities and an analysis of various documents from waste facilities. Documents studied were a storage plan, some contingency/action plans and some extinguishing water investigations. Results from extinguishing water analyses were also obtained from some facilities.

Statistics and experience

Statistics together with experience from fires show that the cause of the fire in most cases is either self-ignition or unknown. A slight increase can also be confirmed in the number of fires per annum during the period 2012–2015. It has not been possible to determine the main reason for this based on the material available. There are some who believe that the increase is due to incorrectly sorted material, e.g. batteries, but it can also be due to the fact that more waste is being handled. Statistics since 2015 were not available during the project.

Self-heating is a common cause of fires in waste. Photo: Anders Lönnermark.

In order to benefit from the experiences that exist within the industry, from both fires that have occurred and safety work undertaken, representatives from various waste facilities were invited to two workshops, one in Gothenburg and one in Stockholm, to discuss issues such as how to prevent fires, how to facilitate dealing with a fire and how best to deal with contaminated extinguishing water.

It is believed that many incidents and fires are caused by incorrectly sorted or incorrectly declared waste, which means that control of goods received is extremely important. It is also confirmed that the handling of contaminated extinguishing water varies a lot. It is felt that it would be good to have the same requirements all over the country. There is also a desire for guidance on investigations and analyses of extinguishing water. The summary of the water analyses studied in the project shows that high contents of metals are present to a large extent in the extinguishing water. The water also contains some fluorinated substances that are now banned.

The workshops generated some recommendations

The discussions during the workshops followed by additional comments from the project’s reference group resulted in 33 recommendations, divided into the following areas:

• Design and layout of the facility
• Organisation and plans for running the operation
• Receipt of waste
• Handling and storage of waste
• Actions during a fire
• Work environment and safety
• Actions after a fire
• Skills development of personnel

A number of desires were also summarised that those attending the workshops had for the future, some relating to the area/industry in general, some to the authorities.

The aim is that the combined knowledge and experiences may be of benefit to the industry as a whole, other stakeholders concerned and authorities, and may in due course also form the basis of future industry recommendations.

Details of the project’s implementation, the workshops, the main results and recommendations may be found in the project report (in Swedish), which is a Swedish Waste Management Association report (2018:09).

The post Fire-Safe Storage of Waste Fuels appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

After a recent visit to a fire-safety Exhibition in Manchester where the headline theme read ‘ Change Attitudes, Be Heard, Save Lives.’ A lot of the major UK companies were represented and the latest probabilistic scenarios were put forward to reveal fire industry innovative products of tomorrow. As a lay person I was really overwhelmed and taken in by all the sights and sounds of the fire safety industry within 21st century. It really was reassuring to see technology being pushed to the fore!

Safeguarding human life and property has never been greater than in modern day history, with the estimated valuation of the Fire Safety market valued at 93.46 Billion USD by the year 2122.(source Markets & Markets)

Latest Fire statistics reveal that there were 564,827 incidents attended by Fire Service between 2017 to March 2018. Of these incidents 167,150 were fires – a 3% increase on the previous year. Statistics also confirm that there were 334 fire related fatalities in the UK last year, a 27% increase in fire related deaths.This figure included the 72 who perished in the Grenfell Tower tragedy. (source; UK Home Office)

We believe there is a gap, an element in fire safety emergency evacuation that has been overlooked. A gap in terms of Fire safety equipment that deals with BS Toughened safety Glass and the ability to identify obstructions in an entrapment emergency situation.
From the turn of the century Architects have been instrumental in how we live, to where we work, in forming buildings we now come to know as cities. Because of its cost and durability, glass became an industrial workhorse and impacted into society, helping to accommodate generations across the globe.

In 1973 as Britain began to freeze under restrictions placed by an Arab oil embargo, Parliament moved swiftly to address the need for fuel efficiency. As part of the new ‘Regulatory Building Regulations’, Britain would embrace a new dawn of energy efficiency and ways of preserving heat, double glazing.

Why is Glass so Tough?

Collision or entrapment accidents result in a significant numbers of deaths and injuries to people in and around buildings every year. The majority of these accidents occur during normal use and involve building features such as doors, windows and areas of fixed glazing, with the risk of injury increased where vulnerable glass is involved. Collisions with glazing are very common as it can, if transparent, be difficult to see and may create confusing lighting effects, presenting particular difficulties for a person with a visual or cognitive impairment. One of the most frequent problems with early forms of windows was their breakability. Glass broke so easily that replacing it was a glass-cutter’s most required service. In 1984 casulties of glass accidents through out the UK was responsible for 16,000 incidents including deep lacerations of tendons, severed nerves and torn muscles. (source: ncbi.nih.gov)

BS Safety Glass

A new tougher more robust toughened glass was introduced ‘Safety Glass’ and endorsed under UK Building Regulations in areas where there is a high risk of collision,such as a person running or colliding with a glazed door/window. These would later be identified under BS6206 – BSEN12600 as ‘Critical Locations’.

The impact test for Safety Glass

In accordance with BS EN 12600:2002 impact testing is carried out on glass samples measuring 876mm x 1938mm where an impactor weighing 50kg is released from a pendulum mechanism at 3 different heights; Class 3 has a drop height of 190mm,class 2 has a drop height of of 450mm, class 1 has a drop height of 1200mm. These impact results would form the toughened safety glass as we recognise to day as catergories class (1) class (2) and (3).

Critical locations

Depending on how large or small the area being covered by glass and its location would determine the classification/thickness of the toughened safety glass put in place ie:The standard defines three drop heights: 190mm, 450mm, 1200mm. the glass is classified at the point in which it breaks.

Everybody has them

All modern windows come with double glazing, which means that there are at least two obstacles to overcome in order to break the glass. First, there are the two panes of glass. If you throw something (a brick or a stone, for example) at a double glazed window, it’s very likely you break only the first pane and the second one remains intact. Second, the sandwich of air between the two sheets of glass acts as a shock absorber, making it very difficult or impossible to break a double glazed pane by hitting it in the middle.

Alternatively it could be commercial environment and be fitted with different thickness’s of BS toughened glass depending on location.

SAFE STEP

My name is Christopher B Carr a retired aircraft engineer. Some 40 years ago my wife witnessed an elderly man perish in a Council house fire. Despite heavy objects being thrown at the toughened glazed window by surrounding neighbours and the man himself, nothing could penetrate and break the toughened glazed window. The elderly man perished.I have always been mindful of events that unfolded that day and kept a close eye on the fire safety industry as it unfolded into the 21st century.

I do not believe anything has changed significantly or adequately in 40 years that addresses the position of entrapment by or BS Toughened glass in an emergency situation.

So we designed SAFE STEP

Through 8 Years of design and meticulous testing SAFE STEP the BS toughened Glass enforcer was built and designed to confront the issue of entrapment by BS Toughened glass.SAFE STEP will revolutionise the fire safety aspect of home/workplace over night making the environment to which you live/work a safer place to be!

We are pleased to announce POWER PUNCH the tungsten carbide tipped glass enforcer that can smash through any toughened BS glazed unit endorsed by UK Building regulations.POWERPUNCH will over come the obstacle of toughened safety glass by giving you valuable seconds in what could be the difference between life or death!

This ‘compact pocket rocket’ that packs a big punch also comes with a quick release light weight emergency escape ladder.By incorporating the emergency escape ladder into the SAFE STEP model we are convinced that we have designed a piece of fire escape apparatus, that is essential to any environment, where a persons safety may be compromised by BS toughened Glass.

Now registered with the IPO and protected by the companies intellecutual attorney, SAFE STEP has recently been nominated by SGUK Health & Safety Innovation Idea Award 2018/19.

Last Word

Next time you happen to travel on any form of public transport, please just take a minute to look over the emergency procedure, within the carriage and you should immediately be aware of signage to all exit points and a flagged up area highlighting a piece of apparatus that will smash through BS toughened safety glass . This is legislation on all UK public transport!

UK GOV Public transport has flagged up and identified toughened BS glass as a potential obstacle within an emergency escape scenario and correctly prepaired and legislated for it. Two areas of our lives where we spend most of our day, our workplace and our home does not?

Glass in the industrial world is simply something we cannot live without or ignore.With so many factors and risks involved, it is essential we identify all risks and foresee each consequence and visualise all potential outcomes. It is vital we take responsibility for ourselves and our families!

Written by Christopher Carr from Safe Step

The post Emergency Escape from Glass Buildings appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

Performance-based fire protection is a central part in the fire safety in all Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden). It is also a necessity to allow sustainable and flexible construction methods and solutions, i.e. non-traditional approaches. The Nordic countries have previously collaborated on building regulations, and the foundations have been laid for driving this development forward together. However, and regardless of the similarities in the Nordic countries, there are differences regarding the restrictions set down in regulations and a lack of uniform guidelines for the verification, control, and inspection of fire protection, for example.

In 2014, a three-year development project – ‘Fire Safety Engineering for Innovative and Sustainable Building Solutions’ – was commenced under the direction of RISE. The project, which was funded by Nordic Innovation, the Development Fund of the Swedish Construction Industry (SBUF), the Directorate of Building Quality (DIBK), and the participating organisations themselves, was created in answer to Nordic Innovation’s call for projects in which new standards are developed or implemented as a driving force for innovation in specific sectors. The project consortium has a total of 15 members from Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden who represent academia, regulation-writing authorities, construction companies, consultants, research institutes, and standardisation bodies.

INSTA Enquiry

The project has resulted in two draft technical specification, that are available for comments during the enquiry phase in the Nordic countries during Spring 2018:

• INSTA 951 Fire Safety Engineering – Probabilistic Methods for Verifying Fire Safety Design in Buildings
• INSTA 952 Fire Safety Engineering – Review and Control in the Building Process

Standards Norway holds the secretariat in which the final work will be done within the framework of the Nordic collaboration on standardisation, INSTA. The enquiry phase provides an opportunity for anyone to give comments on the draft specification. In each Nordic country it is the national fire safety committees that organise the enquiry phase. In Sweden, SIS/TK 181 is the body that has referred the proposal for consideration to the members of TK 181.

More information is available in the final report of the project, RISE Report 2017:42, ‘Fire Safety Engineering for Innovative and Sustainable Building Solutions’.

The post Innovative & Sustainable Buildings Require Fire Safety Engineering appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

Fire doors are the first line of defence against devastating fires and when properly built, installed and maintained, they save lives and protect property. Despite this, fire doors across the UK are still badly fitted, non-compliant, left propped open or damaged and, as a result, could be putting millions of lives at stake.

Fire Door Safety Week (FDSW) kicks off today to continue to educate about the critical role that fire doors play in delaying the spread of smoke and fire, and keeping occupants and firefighters safe.

BRE, which has over 95 years’ experience at the leading edge of building research and development, is supporting the campaign and the BWF to develop a series of emotive and educational fire door safety films. The films highlight the potentially devastating effects of fire and smoke and the need to ensure that best practice and standards are followed throughout the industry.

Hannah Mansell, spokesperson for FDSW, as well as British Woodworking Federation (BWF) Head of Technical Research and Insight, chair of the Passive Fire Protection Forum and a trustee of the Children’s Burns Trust, says: “We’d like to thank BRE for its ongoing support, in allowing us to use its facilities for our filming. We are delighted to be working in collaboration with a cross-section of the industry, to raise awareness of these life-saving messages around fire door safety as well as working to help raise standards to ensure the safety of building occupants and firefighters.”

Debbie Smith, Managing Director at the BRE Global, said: “Fire safety within the design of a building is of critical importance and fire doors are an integral part of that. We at BRE are passionate about driving forward building safety and we are continually working with our stakeholders from across the built environment, such as the BWF and the Fire Door Alliance, to help improve technical knowledge and understanding to help deliver safer buildings for all.

“We fully support Fire Door Safety Week and encourage industry to get involved in helping to raise awareness of the critical role of fire doors and the need for improved industry standards and practice. The need for good installation and ongoing inspection and maintenance of fire doors is not well understood outside of the industry and this must change.”

Leveraging greater unity to support fire safety is paramount. The newly formed Fire Door Alliance sees companies certifying product under the BWF Certifire process continuing unabated, while those currently using the Q-Mark scheme are now able to join the alliance and work with the wider sector to effect much needed change.

FDSW, a national campaign, is run by the British Woodworking Federation, the BWF-Certifire Scheme and the Fire Door Inspection Scheme, in partnership with the Home Office’s National Fire Safety campaign.

Throughout the week, there will be numerous events and campaign activity to raise awareness about the importance of fire door safety. To access a free toolkit of fire safety advice resources to help run your own FDSW activities, visit firedoorsafetyweek.co.uk

The post BWF and BRE Collaborate to Raise Standards in Fire Safety appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

One major result was to legislate that doors in the path of egress must swing out in the direction of travel so as to prevent stampeding in an emergency, thus giving birth to the use of outswinging doors on the exterior of commercial structures. The second major result concerned the proper use of hardware on door openings which remains unlocked in the direction of egress and does not impede the flow of people in an emergency.

Two inventors from Indianapolis, Carl Prinzler and Henry DuPont, took the opportunity to invent the first piece of door hardware designed to allow egress out of a building while providing security and locking features on the outside of the door. Their invention, consisting of a crossbar activating a latch mechanism, in combination with the concept of the outward swinging door, has since become a basic building block of life safety and egress in schools, malls, hospitals and theaters worldwide. As life safety progressed as a field of study, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) began efforts to codify best practices for building exits through a series of pamphlets published in 1912, 1916 and 1918 and then, ultimately, the first edition of the NFPA 101 Life Safety Code in 1927 under its original name, the Building Exits Code. The NFPA 101 Life Safety Code has become a widely adopted document with nine states and all U.S. federally funded building projects requiring conformance to the code in the U.S. Where it has not been explicitly adopted, it has become a de-facto expectation for egress in buildings in the U.S. and other regions including South America, Central America and the Middle East.

Due to the nature of NFPA 101 being an enforceable code or regulation in the U.S. and other jurisdictions globally, it specifies the standards which are deemed acceptable for the building openings and constructions regulated by this code. For the critical life safety hardware invented by Prinzler and DuPont, and now manufactured by dozens of companies around the globe, the minimum standard for testing has become UL 305, UL Standard for Safety Panic Hardware. This standard was the successor to various accident, installation and manufacturing related criteria used by UL to evaluate panic hardware since 1920 when the first panic hardware Listing was approved for publication. UL 305 was developed specifically as a test method focused on the evaluation of panic hardware to be used in emergency exits. Underwriters Laboratories (UL) published the first edition of the standard in 1955 and it has been in continuous use through today’s Sixth Edition. It is also pertinent to mention that UL 305 has also become a referenced mandatory requirement in The International Building Code (IBC) published by the International Code Council (ICC). The IBC document is important for any company interested in export as the regulation is enforced in every U.S. state through various editions. Outside the U.S., IBC-sourced content can be found in the building regulations in various places in the Middle East.

With an understanding of the origins of the panic hardware device, building regulations and the Life Safety Code and how they interrelate to each other, we will now turn the focus to the UL 305 test method and the four critical tests which make-up the Standard. A product must pass the endurance, emergency operation, elevated ambient exposure and low temperature impact tests described in the standard to be considered for certification as a UL Listed panic device or exit lock. These tests are intended to verify quality components and design and to check the strength and ability of the latches and actuating device to operate under load. A brief summary of each test is listed below:

• Endurance Test – A panic hardware device must complete 100,000 consecutive cycles of operation without failure or excess wear. The device must be installed on a test fixture replicating a door and is operated at a maximum rate of 15 cycles per minute. No lubrication beyond what is provided by the factory or by the manufacturer’s recommendation is permitted.
• Emergency Operation Test – With the door in the latched position and no external forces, the release mechanism must be constructed such that the application of a 66N or less horizontal force will actuate the actuating push pad or cross bar and unlatch from the strike(s). This test is conducted before and after the endurance test (above). The measurements must be made at the center and at a location 38mm in from each end of the actuating surface in a direction perpendicular to the door in the direction of swing.

After the conclusion of the endurance test and the measurements of the post-endurance force to operate the test, an additional operational force test is required. This test is intended to measure the amount of force needed to unlatch the device when overcoming an external force on the door. The latched door or doors are to be loaded with 1100N of force, applied horizontally at the midpoint of the outer edge of the door during this test. Under the loaded door conditions, the actuating push pad or cross bar must withdraw the latches and allow the door to be opened with an applied force on the actuating push pad or cross bar of 220N or less. The actuating push pad or cross bar cannot be deformed or bent during this test. A minimum 25.4mm space between the crossbar and the door face must be present when the horizontal force is applied to the crossbar.

This picture shows a simulated door and frame test fixture used to cycle panic hardware through a full range of opening and closing operations.

For products subject to the elevated ambient exposure test and/or the low temperature impact test listed below, the emergency operation tests must be conducted again after the completion of either test.

• Elevated Ambient Exposure Test – This test applies specifically to products which contain materials with a solidus point of less than 538°C. In this test, two complete samples must be placed in an air-circulating oven at a temperature of 204°C for a duration of seven hours. One of the two samples is to have been subjected to the endurance test and emergency operation Test prior to the exposure. After oven exposure, this sample is then to be cooled and subjected to another set of emergency operation tests. The second sample is to be subjected to a physical examination immediately after the oven exposure to ensure the mechanism works as intended and there is no degradation of materials which would prevent the device from operation.
• Low Temperature Impact Test – This test applies specifically to any panic device which includes operating parts with a solidus point of less than 538°C. The device must function as intended with no visible signs of damage and comply with the requirements of the emergency operation test after being subjected to:
  • Minus 20°C environment for a duration of seven hours
  • Three impacts by a swinging pendulum consisting of a solid steel door cylinder ram with a hemispherical end. The impacts must be made against a foamed polystyrene impact buffer attached to the panic device mounted to the surface of a door. The requirements for the pendulum, the direction of travel and weight are as described in the standard. The impacts must be applied while the door is in the closed position and applied to the left, right and center areas of the actuating device.

For products sold in Canada, the Canadian National Standard, CAN/ULC-S132, has an additional opening force test where the amount of force to actuate the device and open the door must be measured at the left, center, and right sides of the device both before and after the endurance test. This is the only additional requirement necessary to conduct to qualify a product for both the U.S. and Canadian markets during testing. If the product is intended to be installed and used on fire door assemblies, additional testing in accordance with the ANSI/UL 10C Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies must be completed.

When a fire rating is required, the device must be tested on doors which swing in and out out of the furnace and the hardware must perform the following: control the deflection of the door, keep continuous engagement of the latches in the strikes and maintain the integrity of the opening through the fire and hose stream endurance tests. No development of holes or gaps through the door and limited flaming is permitted. For products which comply with both panic and fire testing standards, the terminology changes as they are referred to as fire exit hardware instead of panic hardware. The change in wording is deliberate to ensure that the end-user or building regulatory official can ensure the right product is used in the right location regardless of outward appearance. As an additional point of difference between product types, fire exit hardware cannot be equipped with any mechanical form of latch hold-back or latch retraction commonly known as “dogging”.

If we look beyond the UL requirements for panic hardware, it is very common for these devices to also be evaluated against the BHMA sponsored ANSI/BHMA A156.3 test standard for exit devices and ANSI/UL 294, Access Control System Units, for products which will be used as part of a delayed egress system. The ANSI/BHMA A156.3 builds on the mechanical performance testing of UL 305 with added emphasis on product performance through mandatory increased cycling tests, architectural finish requirements, exterior trim tests and strength requirements. The delayed egress function allows for exit devices to be utilized to limit allowed egress through an opening until after a specified duration of time as permitted by the building regulations. This function is intended for use in areas where an opening may be needed for egress in an emergency, but needs to be secured in day to day operations. These devices are often used in combination with magnetic locks and access control devices to manage the time duration and the release of the door leaf or door hardware for operation.

The topic of life safety and door openings is multifaceted. The panic devices used every day in our offices, hotels and hospitals have become important components of these egress openings. Dependence on these components has resulted in a level of performance such that building regulations require that panic devices must bear a third-party certification mark to be accepted by regulatory authorities. To meet the challenge of compliance and market acceptance, UL provides third-party testing, certification and ongoing factory surveillance programs that help manufacturers gain market and building regulation acceptance for hardware products backed by almost one hundred years of UL panic hardware certifications. UL’s recently opened hardware testing laboratory in the United Kingdom includes full UL 305 testing capabilities in a convenient location. This laboratory, which also offers EN 1125 testing capabilities, gives you the ability to meet the needs of multiple global markets with one testing partner.

The presence of increased life safety requirements, test standards such as UL 305 and a type of product created by two inventors from Indianapolis a century ago, has done much to improve the safety of buildings and minimize loss of life. Today, any opportunity to further reduce or eliminate the loss of life seen on that fateful December day in 1903 must be taken seriously, and properly tested and certified panic hardware is one way to achieve that goal. How can UL help you meet panic hardware certification requirements for the next one hundred years?

By: Matthew Schumann, Industry Manager for Fire Resistance and Fire Containment; UL

For more information on how UL can help with your hardware testing and certification needs, please visit the UL website.

The post The Ongoing Story of Emergency Exits & Panic Hardware appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

New South Wales, September 15, 2017

While the workshop employees open up the engine compartment of the bus, I pick up the vehicle inspection protocol and turn on my inspection lamp. The sun is warm, and the air pleasant. I am in a bus garage in the vicinity of Sydney, in south-east Australia. The purpose of my visit is to perform random inspections of the fire-suppression systems that were recently installed in the buses. I begin with the most important inspection points:

• Risk assessment documented – check
• Fire-suppression system correctly dimensioned – check
• Nozzles mounted according to instructions – check
• Extinguishing agent sample saved for analyse – check

A large number of bus fires have resulted in the Transport for New South Wales authority electing to install fire-suppression systems in all buses in the region. During the public procurement of the fire-suppression systems, requirements on certifications were made, primarily according to SPCR 183 – which was developed by RISE Fire Research. Fire-suppression systems that fulfil the certification requirements may use RISE’s P-mark as a sign of assured quality. The P-marking process as a whole includes, among other things, the possibility of follow-up spot inspections on installed s. So far, almost 4,000 buses in Sydney have been equipped with P-marked fire-suppression systems.

Swedish certification rules for fire suppression-systems in buses and coaches have gained ground as a public procurement requirement not only in Sydney. My next trip to perform spot checks is as likely to be to Dubai, Nevada, or Taiwan. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority was the first to include P-marking in this type of public procurement in 2014, although they applied these in the form of recommendations.

The development of the method for testing fire-suppression systems – SP Method 4912 – that forms the basis of the P-marking process was commenced back in 2011 due to the many bus fires, primarily beginning in the engine compartment. The development work was performed in collaboration with vehicle manufacturers and fire-suppression system suppliers from all over the world. Its purpose was to develop a standardised method of assessing the performance of the fire-suppression systems of buses and coaches in a technology-neutral manner, based on objective, performance-based criteria. The performance of products is tested against realistic fire conditions and environmental aspects that are specific to vehicles.

The Swedish Transport Agency assisted with project funding, but its primary contribution was formulating the method and making it possible to implement in international vehicle legislation (UNECE Regulation No. 107). UNECE is the commission of the UN that is responsible for, among other things, vehicle safety regulations in Europe. Two years ago, UNECE passed a resolution on the requirements on fire-suppression systems in buses and coaches; this was through Regulation No. 107, and central parts of SP Method 4912 were used in the specification of the requirements. In practice, this means that there is a piece of EU legislation mandating heavy buses and coaches with combustion engines to be equipped with a fire-suppression system that is tested according to SP Method 4912. Shortly after the requirements were introduced in Europe, they became part of a standard in India as well. However, Israel was actually the first to introduce government requirements, in 2013.

Several methods and certification rules have since been created by RISE: The development of a testing method for fire-detection systems in heavy vehicles funded by FFI – Strategic Vehicle Research and Innovation – and a new procedure for testing fire-suppression systems in heavy vehicles other than buses and coaches. This summer, the South African Bureau of Standards placed these methods under consideration, with the intention of soon making it a standard in South Africa.

The detection and suppression of an occurring fire is, however, the last line of defence against vehicle fires. In addition to active fire protection, preventative measures should be strongly considered. Vehicle fires are often related to a lack of preventative maintenance, as well as to design flaws wherein fuel and ignition sources are not sufficiently separated. Thus, SP Method 5289 – ‘Fire risk management procedure for vehicles’ – was developed with accompanying certification rules (SPCR 190), as a management system for systematic fire safety work for vehicle manufacturers. The purpose of this was to provide guidance for the carrying out of fire-prevention work. The first commission came from Iran in 2016. At that time, fires in buses were something of a national concern as a result of a number of tragic accidents. Iranian television networks were present when representatives from RISE presented the project plan. The latest development project is taking place in collaboration with the International Road Union (IRU), and has the aim of expanding the concept to also encompass vehicle-operating businesses.

In summary, RISE Fire Research has, in direct response to the needs of society and market demand, developed:

• A testing method (SP Method 4912) and accompanying P-mark (SPCR 183) that guarantees the quality of fire-suppression systems in the engine compartments of buses and coaches. These form the basis for legal requirements or standards in a growing number of countries – today, over 50.
• A P-mark (SPCR 199) that, together with SP Method 4912, guarantees the quality of fire-suppression systems in the engine compartments of heavy vehicles.
• A testing method (SP Method 5320) with an accompanying P-mark (SPCR 197) that guarantees the quality of fire-detection systems in the engine compartments of buses, coaches, and other heavy vehicles.
• A risk-assessment methodology (SP Method 5289) that, together with the developed P-marks (SPCR 190, SPCR 191) assists vehicle manufacturers and vehicle-operating businesses in maintaining a high fire safety level for vehicles.

The interest and success that our projects have received are expressions of the need for standards that address the foremost challenges of our field. Many general standards exist, but there is often a lack of standards that specifically deal with areas that require specialist knowledge. Fires in buses, coaches, and heavy vehicles are potentially catastrophic scenarios that often involve complex causal connections. It is gratifying that RISE can fill this gap and contribute to increased safety as far away as south-east Australia.

Imgage: Buses and coaches in Australia ready for fire-suppression system inspections. by Max Rosengren, RISE Fire Research.

The post Protecting Vehicles Against Fires appeared first on Fire Safety Search.

A growing number of electric and hybrid vehicles are driving on our roads. Knowledge on the risks associated with these vehicles with new energy carriers is limited.

A vehicle fire is often extremely intense and can have significant safety and environmental consequences. The risk of vehicle fires, when considering the prevalence of road tunnels and underground garages, means that questions concerning rescue operations and societal costs are becoming increasingly important.

Dafo Vehicle Fire Protection is therefore contributing to a new research project funded by Sweden’s innovation agency Vinnova – Strategic vehicle research and innovation (FFI), where risks posed by lithium-ion vehicle batteries will be addressed and investigated.

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden initiated this project on 7 May focusing on how fire risks posed by lithium-ion batteries in vehicles should be managed.

“With this new project – in which RISE, Scania, the Swedish Association of Vehicle Workshops (SFVF), NEVS and Fogmaker are also participating – we will map the fire risks associated with lithium-ion batteries and mitigating the consequences of fires in electric and hybrid vehicles. The big increase in electric vehicles and the transition to renewable fuels means that this is a very important and exciting project,” says Johan Balstad, Business Area Manager, Dafo Vehicle Fire Protection AB.

Balstad continues “Fire risks related to battery spaces, including specific risks when charging and procedures for handling electric vehicles and batteries after a crash, bearing in mind the risk of fire at a later stage, will be studied. This work will lead to future safety solutions, including system design and battery placement. Our focus of this project will be to investigate the extent to which fixed/integrated fire suppression systems, that are widely used to protect engine compartments on heavy vehicles, can be applied to vehicles powered by li-ion batteries, as well as how the systems should be designed. We hope that it will be possible to leverage existing resources to reduce the fire risks – as an example, 94% of all public transport buses in Sweden already have fixed fire suppression systems installed.”

The post Dafo Vehicle Fire Protection in New Research Project appeared first on Fire Safety Search.