Fire door in 4 star hotel with broken overhead closer
This was the result of tests carried out on a door in Grenfell Tower that was intact following the blaze because it was on a lower floor.
In many buildings I visit I see doors that should achieve a 30- or 60-minute rating that probably will not achieve more that 10 to 15 minutes. This is due to a number of reasons including poor maintenance and fitting, damage and incorrect hardware together with no fire or smoke strips.
There are also the numerous fire doors that are wedged open or have been removed completely – which obviously means no fire resistance at all. I’d like to say that these problems are rare, but unfortunately I see them all too often.
Some 25 years ago I was approached by a manufacturer that wanted to supply a very large order of 30-minute fire doors to a large Victorian district general hospital. They asked me to approve the product.
I asked the manufacturer for the test evidence and was given a sheet of paper that confirmed the door had passed a 30-minute fire test. But when I examined the evidence I could see the test was for a single door and I indicated to the manufacturer that many of these doors would be double doors.
Fire doors that passed the 30-minute test for single doors later failed the test for double doors in just 11 minutes
He replied that they would give the same result in this configuration. Had I believed this statement the hospital would have been protected by 11 minute fire resisting doors.
Fortunately, I did have doubts about this statement so I asked the manufacturer to have the doors tested in the required configuration. He was reluctant to do so on the grounds it was a very expensive procedure, but I pointed out that this was a very large order and I needed to be certain that the doors would provide the 30 minute rating.
The manufacturer finally agreed to the test and to everyone’s amazement they failed in just over 11 minutes. Obviously he did not get the contract.
In another 4-star hotel
Fire-door to kitchen in new library (cut away at head of door)
I was aware at that time of a great deal of misunderstanding in respect of fire doors so I approached Central Television and put a proposal forward to produce a video-based fire door educational Package. This was produced after considerable research, time and filming. It was financed by a health authority and carefully selected manufacturers that were leaders in their respective fields.
Central Television had initially indicated they could not envisage a video about fire-doors justifying 30 minutes of footage I’d anticipated. As it happens, by the end of the project we had a package that consisted of two videos running to 2.5 hours and a substantial reference manual.
The videos were produced in sections for easy reference and amendment. The first video dealt with new doors and the second with upgrading. To give you an idea of the areas covered:
The final product sold to most fire and building control authorities, the Fire Service College, architects and other interested parties and was described as the “third major milestone in the history of fire doors” by the late Peter Jackman. The package also received a number of other awards including from the Prime Minister’s Quality Initiative.
These were typical of the comments received from one district council:
“The seminars organised by this office successfully took place last month and your video held the attention of all those attending on the day of training. In this connection I wish to thank you and your staff for all the assistance and support given […] over the last few months.”
“Three neighbouring councils were represented at these events.
“Four representatives from [one] fire service intend distributing the information acquired by the seminar throughout the Region and will be updating and amending the guidance note issued by […]
“The booklet and video were the main reason for training on this difficult subject being made possible and other building control offices will be told about how your product has been put to use by organising full day events.”
Fire-doors in 3 star hotel (hinge removed)
Fire-doors removed from stairs in flats
I was personally pleased to have produced an educational package that dispelled many myths around the subject and put the right information into the hands of people that needed it. Interestingly, the introduction to the package contained a sequence of the 11-minute fire door failure that inspired me to produce it.
I approached the industry about updating our 1992 fire door film but there appears to be little enthusiasm
Obviously, the package is a little dated now. While I’ve approached industry to update it there appears to be little enthusiasm, which is a great pity because I believe that the education of the enforcers, trade and public is a key issue.
I did give a copy to a very high profile colleague in the fire door industry recently and these were his comments: “I was recently very fortunate to view the above titled film. It was made in 1992 featuring some very knowledgeable fire door industry professionals, some sadly no longer with us.
“Even though made 25 years ago much of its content and message is still pertinent today and it’s a great example of what can be achieved when industry professional come together.”
That last paragraph is something we need to give more consideration to and an aspect I have been a keen advocate of for many years.
I think that the Grenfell fire door failure is the tip of the iceberg’. While we don’t yet know all the details, if you retested many fire doors in use today you would probably get similar results.
What you have to consider is that when doors are tested they are usually brand new doors, but when doors have been in situ for some time and get damaged, modified or warped their fire resistance can downgrade quite dramatically.
Look at the photos I’ve included for examples of poor fire-door safety. Some of these are from prestige buildings including hotels, libraries and museums.
What does this say about our enforcement, standards and approach to fire safety in the UK?
Closer removed from fire door
Unfortunately, these photographs are just a small sample of defects and problems I’ve observed. I did notify the respective persons about these problems and where there were serious concerns I passed these on to the respective authorities. Some acknowledged the notification and thanked me and others made no communication at all.
There is little doubt in my mind that we need stronger enforcement in this area together with better education of all people involved, including the public and responsible persons. We also need mandatory identification and record keeping because at present it’s nearly impossible to identify which doors are actually fire doors.
It was easy to identify fire doors when they were indicated on the fire plan with the fire certificate
In the past it was easy to identify fire doors because they were indicated on the fire plan with the fire certificate.
However, with today’s mainly text-based fire risk assessments (FRAs) it is virtually impossible. Yet as we have seen with the Cathedral Yard Fire, you can easily lose the FRA in a serious fire.
To illustrate part of the problem, last week I received an email from a friend of mine who was carrying out a patient assessment of a hospital area. She raised the question of why the fire doors were “propped open” and was told that “this was because otherwise “patients would think that outpatients was closed”. The fire officer (who doesn’t seem to be kept updated) said that as long as the remainder of the outer area was intact, it didn’t matter.
Poorly fitted fire doors
Poorly fitted fire door in a national museum
Know your fire safety responsibilities.
Business owners have many responsibilities, but the consequences of neglecting your fire safety responsibilities are potentially unthinkable.
Download this guide to get:
As a security installer of CCTV and wireless alarms I am not an expert regarding fires. As a ‘layman’ regarding fire safety and in relation to all towers my views are as below and to be taken as general thoughts and not of Grenfell in isolation. In addition to recommended standards. All towers should ideally have: A sprinkler or mist system. A wired and wireless alarm system with at least one of each detector in each apartment as well as corridors. A Thermal imaging camera on each side of the building with a heat trigger to alarm and give early… Read more »
Knowledge, information and understanding is the key. This must be required information for all building managers and safety advisors.
Because the building fire was rapidly spreading from the outside of the building and it’s possible that some of the internal doors in the flats could have been left open. 1, how many fire doors (within the flats) from the outside of the building to the front door of the flat if all doors are closed 2, How many fire doors from the flat entrance to the core of the building (fire escape) Did the fire spread internally from floor to floor through breached communal fire doors? in your opinion would the fire doors on the upper floors (closed with… Read more »
Many of the tower fires show the fire leaping from floor to floor by external means – the cladding being on fire external to the buildings. The fire then spreads inside the buildings once windows fail and smash. How would fire doors and sprinkler systems stop an external fire?
The fire certificate only indicated where a fire rated door should be present. This was no guarantee that it was a fire door.
Some fire doors where indicated by coloured pegs which identified there fire resistance. This was a very effective indication but was not mandatory and is now very really used. Maybe it should be mandatory.
My own research and experience in respect of fire safety supports Alan’s comments about fire doors with one fire safety enforcement officer that I spoke to stating that it was normal to find self-closing fire-resisting doors being abused in every building he visited. Sadly, I recall that this was also my expectation during my own experiences as a fire safety enforcement officer some thirty years ago. So the question I ask myself is why we are in the same (or worse) situation today? Why, in the progress and advancement of fire safety engineering over the last forty or so years… Read more »
on the fire alarm side I think a system should have different levels of alarm for apartment blocks stay put policy is fine for a one unit contained fire but multiple unit fire should activate an evacuation alarm to the full building
Fired doors are only one part of the equasion The services passing above the doors are Frequently never properly firestopped, contractors are never well versed on the correct Firestopping procedures as are the people inspecting them, fire dampers are also often Not properly supported and would not stand up For the designated time scale. Why on the the escape stairs do they not incorporate a Pressurised system to minimise The smoke risk as in a lot of commercial Buildings. Finally where the fire brigade was responsible For drop testing at least ten percent of damper Installations, personally I have found… Read more »
Great piece Alan. There is still so much to be done with regard to improving the effectiveness of fire doors in the built environment. The biggest problem is lack of understanding at all levels across the construction industry. Many new fire doors are not fit for purpose due to inadequate specifications resulting in incorrect selection of products and non-compliant installation.
Carl, Whilst I think I understand what you are saying the truth of the matter is that the Fire Certificate would specify the exact fire resistance of the door eg 30 or 60 minutes and this was indicated clearly both in the text and on the plan. What I think you are saying is that you could not guarantee they were 30 or 60 minute fire resisting and obviously at that time this was down to the Inspecting Officer and the FRS policy. I will tell you an interesting story about the “coloured pegs” that you refer toys a “very… Read more »
Jim, One aspect that I have found useful when looking at the problem of fire doors and their abuse is to offer a Fire Door Usage Assessment and what I do here is to look at each fire door and the typical usage that it gets and recommend an individual tailored assessment. If for example there is a constant flow of people or goods through a door opening I may recommend some form of automatic hold open device or automatic opening device. Where there may be frail or elderly people I recommend door hardware especially engineered for this type of… Read more »
I believe the residents of Grenfell Towers were given advice to remain in their residential units in the event of a fire. In my opinion the person who gave that advice should face charges of manslaughter. Also the person responsible for maintaining clear egress routes from the building. From my understanding this tragedy underlines a lack of understanding by local authorities who are resoncible for correct preventative measures put in place in order to reduce the tragic loss of life when incidents of this nature occur. As for fire doors they only work as a barrier to hold up the… Read more »
Sadly you are preaching to the converted. I too regularly see propped open, damaged, or inadequate fire doors (and other inadequate fire precautions). As a simple example I have removed twelve door wedges from the same fire doors at a local college over a four month period. Without more active enforcement little will change. Once the politicians have finished assuring us all that “Lessons must be learned to ensure this never happens again” Grenfell will get forgotten by most people as soon as the next avoidable loss of life occurs.
I am an architect and wholly agree that for the most part that so many residential passive fire protection measures like self closing FR doors are becoming unworkable where there is a widespread assumption that non-compliance is preferable to the inconvenience of self closers on domestic doors. I suppose that the change from inner room fire doors with self closers to flat entrance door simply made life easier for people who then only had to remove 1 closer rather than up to half-a-dozen Perkos.
Richard, It is good to see a response from your profession and obviously non compliance is an important fact in the equation as is the removal of self closing devices. As I am sure you are aware with self closing devices on inner room doors in a persons home this was nearly impossible to control as people do not always recognise the danger. Some people even object to the fitting of sprinklers in their home. One of the areas that I believe we need to improve is the type of self closing device that is used because so often people… Read more »
I agree that without more active enforcement things are unlikely to improve but sometimes simply removing wedges does not cure the problem. As you will see from my reply to Richard the architect sometimes the problem deserves more thought and maybe looking at why people wedge the door and the potential problems they can cause can lead to a more sustainable solution. Obviously, I am not aware of why the same fire doors are constantly “wedged open” but perhaps there is a high volume of people at certain times, or people have to move large items through the doors or… Read more »
Maurice, You make some interesting comments in your reply and I will give you my thoughts on them. I often see services passing above and around fire doors not adequately fire stopped and you are correct that contractors are sometimes not aware of the problems and this together with the person carrying out the Fire Risk Assessment not being aware of the problem leads to an unacceptable situation. From my article you can see that quite often people are not aware of which doors should be fire doors – a situation that has been made much worse with the removal… Read more »
There is no such thing as a ‘fire door’. The correct term is ‘fire-resisting door’. Get your terminology correct.
Colin, Clearly, the expert panel on Grenfell have also got the terminology wrong: “The expert panel has concluded there is a performance issue with these Manse Masterdor fire doors, which do not consistently meet the 30 minute fire resistance standard. Nevertheless, the National Fire Chiefs Council has advised the expert panel the risk to public safety remains low. They point out that fire protection in a building is developed using a range of measures so a failure of one protection measure – such as fire doors – should not significantly change the overall safety of residents. In addition, all doors… Read more »
In a situation where the only protection to the escape route is the flat entrance door then clearly its failure to restrict spread of cold smoke and fire would compromise safe escape. In that situation risk to safety would be high. In a situation where a staircase has protection from two doors (the flat entrance and the door to the stair lobby) the risk is reduced relative to how well the doors have been installed and maintained. Evidence from the inspection reports of certificated fire door inspectors (CertFDI) reveals that many fire doors have ineffective seals (fire and cold smoke),… Read more »
The fire doors would not stop the spread of fire on the external skin, but they would have stopped the spread of smoke and fire into the protected zones on the lobbies and stair which were necessary for escape. Reports said that the escape route was unuseable due to smoke and heat which could only be down to the failure of the fire compartmentation around the protected zone. There are many record photographs showing doors into the protected zone that are obviously not properly fitted fire doors.