Ronan Posted July 19, 2023 Report Share Posted July 19, 2023 Hi, I am getting more and more passionate about fire safety regulations, especially on fire rated doors, also thanks to this forum. I am trying to understand more about why gaps are so important and how they were determined. For example - why 10mm gap is allowed at the bottom but only 4mm on the sides and on top? - why 5mm would fail? What's the difference with 4? That smoke seals are only 4mm or because flames would pass in 5mm but not in 4? - why 2mm is ok but less it's not? Thank you for helping me in understanding more. Could you suggest a good course or certification on these matters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Ashdown MAFDI Posted July 20, 2023 Report Share Posted July 20, 2023 https://www.firedoorscomplete.com/training-qualification We would be please to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronan Posted July 20, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2023 thank you! It would be great if anyone could answers my questions, worst case I will learn at the course! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronan Posted July 21, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2023 After looking more into gaps I'm a bit confused. It doesn't seem like those 3+/-1 mm are a legal requirement, they are "recommended". Is that true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Ashdown MAFDI Posted August 1, 2023 Report Share Posted August 1, 2023 Referenced in BS 8214: 2016 Timber-based Fire Door Assemblies: Code of Practice https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/timber-based-fire-door-assemblies-code-of-practice/standard but not necessarily a legal requirement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyB Posted August 1, 2023 Report Share Posted August 1, 2023 As Neil says the BS isn't explicitly a legal requirement, but would probably be cited by prosecution & used by the Magistrate as reference to a standard that would meet the requirements of the legislation - you would need to show why not following this still provided adequate protection & thus no risk of serious injury or death to relevant persons Very few things in detail are explicit in the actual legislation, which sets broad functional aims, however many are implicit requirements, the onus being on the Duty Holder to show that an alternative approach would still equate to a suitable standard of safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.