Matt Clare and Christian Watkins discuss their experiences of fire door issues, including common defects, good practice in action and potential positive changes ahead.
Fire doors are an essential part of fire compartmentation in a building, but for some reason many of those responsible for building fire safety have a laissez-faire attitude to both fire door installation and upkeep. As such, we often see fire door failures when inspecting a building, and that may not be the reason we were called out in the first place.
Christian: I began working with Trident Building Consultancy in 2017 after the Grenfell Tower fire. I’ve always felt strongly about the importance of fire doors as I originally trained as a joiner. When I started to work on fire doors, it was new territory. The specification we worked to was strict, and I soon became aware of the lack of education around fire doors.
When I came to Trident, one of my first projects included multiple residential tower blocks. We had been called to these 1960s built buildings as they featured the same cladding system, following a refurbishment in 2015, that had been used on Grenfell Tower. A number of surveys were conducted looking at the cladding and internally at the fire compartmentation systems in place. On first look, we weren’t filled with confidence as we could see the fire doors had been hung badly.
We carried out an intrusive survey on a sample of seven fire doors per each block. Architraves were removed to expose the detailing between the door frame and structural opening, to allow us to cross check it with requirements of the fire test evidence. Through the survey we found that the door frame installations were not compliant with the relevant test evidence, and wouldn’t provide the required period of fire resistance. This defect, among others found, resulted in all of the fire doors and frames needing to be replaced.
It was shocking to see that every single one of the sample fire doors we inspected was non compliant. Once the architrave was removed, we could see the back of the door frame was packed with pink foam. This wasn’t going to act as any sort of barrier and clearly wasn’t in accordance with the test evidence for the fire doors.
We put a report together advising the building owner of all the changes that needed to be made to make the tower blocks safe, and had 24 hour fire wardens on the estate while waiting for remedial work to begin.
Commmon defects
We repeatedly see the same failings when it comes to fire safety in buildings. I feel a lot of this is down to a lack of understanding from building owners about the risk this puts those inhabiting their building under. A lack or absence of maintenance records is common. On average we advise fire doors are checked every six months, or more frequently if they’re in constant use, such as in a hospital. The problem is people aren’t doing it.
Missing or painted intumescent seals are another common occurrence. Again, this is down to a lack of education on how this compromises fire resistance. When we come across this, it means all seals must be replaced. Many older properties have fanlight windows above doors which are often replaced with plywood, which doesn’t offer the fire resistance needed.
Integrated ventilation grills are installed without any fire resisting properties, and additional untested ironmongery is also installed. Ironmongery must be tested as part of the fire door, but many don’t see the harm in adding a key code lock once the door’s been fitted. The locks are often cheap and have no fire rating, so they invalidate the fire door.
Poor workmanship when it comes to installation is an issue too. The gaps between the door and the door frame are often excessive. This is seen most in new buildings, where the top of a door is planed off to get a better fit. Best practice for the specification of a fire door is to get one that has been third party certificated and comes as a doorset.
Third party certificated doors, such as the BWF-CERTIFIRE scheme, come with a sticker on the top. The sticker gives all the details somebody in charge of maintaining the fire doors would need to know. The problem is that many carpenters don’t know this, so when they plane the door they’re removing vital information and compromising the door’s functionality.
Door closers are often not functioning so need adjusting and away from the fire door - we often find fire escape signage is missing or incorrect too.
Good practice
But we have seen some good workmanship. I was recently working on a new build care home project in Scarborough which had a clerk of works, and I was impressed with how they oversaw the installation of fire doors. I inspected the development during the plastering stage when the fire doors were also being installed.
It was interesting to note that the carpenters were fitting the doors extremely tightly into the frame. This was to allow for the timber shrinkage that occurs when heating is applied to the building and the plaster finishes dry out. Once the moisture levels had stabilised, final adjustments were made to the doors.
This approach ensured that gaps between the door, frame and threshold didn’t shrink and then exceed the maximum acceptable standards. I’ve never seen that method being used before and it prevented anyone having to go back and rectify the doors post build.
Future improvements
Matt: This approach is the reason why we need the return of the clerk of works role. When you think about the reason poor quality buildings come to be, design and build is partly to blame. It is absolutely clear to me that such contracts and procurement routes - where risk in construction contracts is being shifted onto the contractors - has driven the wrong behaviours when it comes to building safety.
But there’s also an overall decline in standards of workmanship and care and pride when it comes to our buildings, and that’s the very pernicious attitude we need to change fastest, across all trades and professions. Last year, we responded to the interim report from Dame Judith Hackitt, calling for clerks of works to be reinstated as the norm on new build projects.
Our strongest support goes to the idea of a compulsory competency register for fire door installers, in line with the recommendations in the Raising the Bar report. We recommend clients only use complete fire doorsets that are specified and tested through a third party certification scheme, as Christian rightly said, which provides full traceability.
Competency is key to rebuilding faith in the construction industry. Another is collaboration. We must seek advice from other experts in the construction industry, as we can’t physically undertake every element of designing and constructing a building, but we can and must understand it. That’s certainly been the case we’ve seen around the lack of understanding of fire doors. It often seems an impossible task to keep up to date with all that’s happening in the world of construction, and hopefully the reform to the building safety regulatory system will make it less ambiguous.
A consultation was held on proposals for the reform of the building safety regulatory scheme – Building a Safer Future - and at the time of writing, the evidence is still being looked at and considered. Progress has already been made on compliance of fire doors after investigations by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) found a glass reinforced plastic fire door failed a fire resistance test after 15 minutes, despite being marketed as resisting up to 30 minutes.
Recommendations were made and the Association of Composite Door Manufacturers (ACDM) pulled this type of fire door from the market while a testing programme was established. Manufacturers were told they must sign up to a third party accreditation scheme, and all existing fire doors of this type were to be replaced. Following this, MHCLG did an investigation into timber fire doors, with all doors tested passing the test and - in some cases - exceeding the fire resistance time required.
Alongside the reform consultation was a call for evidence for the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Those partaking were asked questions such as how to provide clarity in the regulatory framework and how fire safety risks are managed holistically in high risk residential buildings. We look forward to the outcome of this work and the changes it can bring for the better of both the fire and construction industries, but ultimately for the people in the buildings.
Until reforms and further updated guidance is available, initiatives like Fire Door Safety Week are a useful way to spread the message of the importance of fire doors. It’s obvious that property owners are not getting the information they need about their accountability and the steps to making their buildings safe. They are the responsible person, and if they’re not undertaking the maintenance records themselves they need to get somebody competent that can.
Continued professional development (CPD) in fire doors, and diplomas, are for those who want to better understand the role of fire doors and how to maintain them. We must keep educating ourselves and others. It is our responsibility both as property owners and construction professionals to ensure that we are prioritising fire safety throughout a building’s life. Properly specified, fitted and maintained fire doors are a fundamental part of this.